Talk:Public Books

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Independent Public Books page[edit]

Public Books is only loosely affiliated with Public Culture at this point and deserves its own page. Public Books has been covered at the New York Times, Bookforum, the Chronicle of Higher Education, New York Magazine, Flavorwire, Brooklyn Quarterly and other outlets. It's no longer the case that Public Books is a kind of subsidiary of Public Culture. Public Culture is an academic journal affiliated with the Institute for Public Knowledge at NYU. Public Books is no longer affiliated with IPK, and it now shares only one editorial staff member with Public Culture. The two publications have different aims and different contents. This page should no longer redirect to Public Culture, nor does it fit within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals. Disclosure: I'm an intern at Public Books and I've been asked to update the page so that it accurately reflects the fact that Public Books and Public Culture have gone their separate ways.

@Randykitty: I'm planning on adding all of these sources to the page. Can we agree to undo your revert?-- Goofyjourno (talk) 16:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you can show that this is notable. Several of the links you give above go to an error page. The only live one (Flavorwire) is only an in-passing mention. --Randykitty (talk) 18:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Randykitty: I'm sorry I wasted your time with those broken links. I had the external link syntax wrong. They should all function now. As to notability: The pieces at New York Magazine and Brooklyn Quarterly are both substantially about Public Books. And those are both reliable sources independent of Public Books. Founding editor Sharon Marcus published a piece at PMLA all about Public Books (independent publication, if not author). And Colloquy at Harvard interviewed another Public Books staff member. Public Books received the #BeastBest award from The Daily Beast. The website has received attention independent of its (now tenuous) connection with Public Culture. Thanks for your response. --Goofyjourno (talk) 20:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Membership in WikiProject Academic Journals[edit]

@Randykitty: I really don't think that this belongs in the academic journals project, unless I'm misunderstanding the purpose of the project. Public Books is a book review site that publishes reviews meant for a general audience. The articles don't go through peer review, and are almost always book review or personal essays. Public Books doesn't publish original research. Sorry for removing the membership notice without discussion here. --Goofyjourno (talk) 05:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was thrown by the mention of academics in the first sentence... Changed. --Randykitty (talk) 12:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]