Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
The book review listed is not RS as it appears to be a blog. The publishers site has extracts from <em>Kirkus Review, Newsweek and Publisher's Weekley<em>. If there are published reviews to go with those extracts rather than simple comments all is good. I tried to find them but my guess is they are from the early '80s. While Tevis has written some very notable books I do not think he is notable enough that the book passes ] criteria #5 but others may disagree. I suspect it is an 'also ran' compared to his other works. ]] 21:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The book review listed is not RS as it appears to be a blog. The publishers site has extracts from <em>Kirkus Review, Newsweek </em>and <em> Publisher's Weekley</em>. If there are published reviews to go with those extracts rather than simple comments all is good. I tried to find them but my guess is they are from the early '80s. While Tevis has written some very notable books I do not think he is notable enough that the book passes ] criteria #5 but others may disagree. I suspect it is an 'also ran' compared to his other works. ]] 21:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel
This article has no sources and no claim of notability. I recommend that it be redirected to Walter Tevis until sources verifting notability can be found per WP:NRV. Does anyone know of any reviews of this book on or off line? All I can find about the book are comments that he "...also wrote..." it. Jbh15:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Article has at least one source. I am also going to go to a print edition of "The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction" which is not some user edited website, to get a reference.
@MacRusgail: Enough. Read WP:HOUND. "Correct use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Misplaced Pages policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles." Any more accusations of stalking and I will raise the matter at WP:ANI. --NeilN19:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@NeilN: Thank you. I spent a while writing a long reply and edit conflicted with your post. When that happens it usually means that what I had to say did not need saying at the time. Jbh21:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Sources
The book review listed is not RS as it appears to be a blog. The publishers site has extracts from Kirkus Review, Newsweek and Publisher's Weekley. If there are published reviews to go with those extracts rather than simple comments all is good. I tried to find them but my guess is they are from the early '80s. While Tevis has written some very notable books I do not think he is notable enough that the book passes WP:NBOOKS criteria #5 but others may disagree. I suspect it is an 'also ran' compared to his other works. Jbh21:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
