Talk:The New York Review of Books/Archive 1

Archive 1

Infobox

I'm not 100% sure the info i've provided is correct in this infobox. please add to it as i will endeavour to do so. Jpeob 10:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Pretentious description

Does anyone else think..."which takes, as its point of departure that the discussion of important books is itself an indispensable literary activity...." is a bit pretentious particularly at the start of the article? --Tom 17:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Can the quip about the "amazing pettiness" of the letters be delted?

Photo

HAHAHA I cannot believe the photo in the article! Seriously, doesn't anyone else think it's kinda inappropriate? --Jlpspinto 01:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It is really funny. But hey... it does indeed show various copies of The New York Review of Books, as claimed... and a cat... - Reaverdrop (talk/nl/w:s) 07:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there a reason why the photo was deleted? I think its humorous and irreverant nature was appropriate for the article. Maybe it could be inserted lower down...  ? -- Ssilvers 20:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Sale of the Review

It is true that the Review was sold to Rea S. Hederman by the founders, but I can't remember the exact date. I'm sure a google search would turn up something. I doubt that the amount of the sale was disclosed, since it was a private sale. However, both Bob Silvers and Barbara Epstein (until her death) stayed on as the editors after Hederman bought the Review. -- Ssilvers 20:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The sale is discussed here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:24, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

International content

The following statement has been removed from this article: "In addition to domestic issues, the Review covers issues of international interest, including frequent articles about Israel." This information simply describes an important component of the content of the NY Review, which one can see in its table of contents in each issue. The sources given are (1) Commentary (magazine) and (2) Mondoweiss.

• The Commentary (magazine) link is here. It links to the NYRB "Topic" at Commentary and shows a series of more than a dozen articles in Commentary that comment on articles in the New York Review of Books, at least 10 of which focus on Israel or US policy concerning Israel.
• The Mondoweiss link is here. It discusses a piece in the Review that it calls "important" and says that "the Review has an enormous effect inside Jewish life...." Mondoweiss is a blog co-edited by respected journalists: Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz. Here is their About page.

It would be a major omission in the description of the content of the NY Review if we did not mention that a significant part of its content is international content, and anyone who looks at its table of contents, not to mention the two links above, will see that it regularly publishes pieces focusing on Israel, Israeli policy and US policy concerning Israel. Nevertheless, if you don't like the Mondoweiss link, it is not essential and could be deleted. I suggest that the content be restored to the article. At a bare minimum, it should mention that the Review covers international topics. -- 66.65.112.230 (talk) 17:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The use of the first link is WP:OR as it doesn't say it directly the second one is not WP:RS.--Shrike (talk) 18:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind Welcome message. Would you please look at this edit?: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_New_York_Review_of_Books&diff=481471141&oldid=481451796 It seems to me that this information is essential in this article, as it merely describes the content of the publication, which one can see, in any case, in its table of contents in each issue. Most appreciated, thanks! -- 66.65.112.230 (talk) 15:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Editing for organization

Did some editing to include more content about what the journal was when first published, rather than immediately including all the quotes written 50 years later on its anniversary.Parkwells (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Conversation on Guillaume2303 page

• Hi, I did look at it and as I said on the talk page of WP Magazines, I don't see anything improper. The text is sourced to a blog and smacks of POV. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I would ask that you please look again: Note that the statement is also referenced to Commentary (magazine). What if the blog reference were dropped, and the material were simply: In addition to domestic issues, the Review covers issues of international interest, including frequent articles about Israel. See "Topic: the New York Review of Books", Commentary, accessed March 11, 2012. I think if you'll look at the link to Commentary, in which writers at Commentary describe this aspect of The New York Review of Books, you'll see that it is a key component of the content of this magazine. Thanks for your patience. -- 66.65.112.230 (talk) 16:19, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

• I had a look at the Commentary article, which does not substantiate the phrase you give. It talks about a piece in the review and nowhere says something like "the review regularly publishes about Israel". The addition of this text and this reference is therefore improper. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 16:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry to keep bothering you about this, but did you scroll down? The Commentary link shows a series of more than a dozen articles focused on the New York Review of Books, at least 10 of which discuss articles in the Review that focus on Israel, Israeli policy or US policy concerning Israel. Again, sorry, but I think this is important, and that to remove all mention of this from the NYRB article is to ignore a key component of its content, which, in any case, one can see from the table of contents in each issue. -- 66.65.112.230 (talk) 16:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

• The Middle East conflicts are an important part of international news, so it would really be notable if the review did not pay any attention to Israel. Using the link to the Commentary as a source for the statement that you propose to include is borderline POV and synthesis and original research at best. Please feel free to launch a request for comment on the talk page of the article on the review. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree totally with Guillaume2303.I think as it relevant to the article I will copy it to the talk there--Shrike (talk) 18:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree with Guillaume2303; discussion of Israel and Mideast is within context of international news, not "key component". It also has given much discussion to developments in Europe during the breakup of Yugoslavia and resulting wars, breakup of Soviet Union, Arab Spring, etc.Parkwells (talk) 17:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC)