Talk:You Like It Darker

	Novels portal 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 Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Short story task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed merge of Finn (short story) into You Like It Darker[edit]

I do not believe that "Finn" is notable. The only reviews in reliable sources appear to be in the context of broader reviews of You Like It Darker, and none of those reviews devote more than a sentence or two to the story. A brief plot summary and reception can be included in the article on the book. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would respectfully disagree. "Finn" is a standalone work by a highly prominent author, and stands out because of the unorthodox manner in which it was published. It was reviewed upon publication by USA Today and by the literary essayist Bev Vincent. I would suggest that, had it not been collected, it would still be notable; should it receive more attention post-collection, naturally that would increase its notability. McPhail (talk) 20:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One review by a literary essayist is not enough to establish notability. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's notable by being a work of Stephen King. Jmj713 (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited because notability is defined as having significant coverage in reliable sources. Not every work created by Stephen King needs an article. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are referencing the fifth criteria at NBOOK, which I'm not sure I have ever seen applied to newly-published works given the "historically" tagline. These works are ones which have typically been studied in academic journals. Whereas this a new work and should at least pass GNG. It did not receive significant coverage upon publication on Scribd in 2022 and that remains unchanged even now that there are passing mentions in reviews for You Like It Darker. I also think #5 would moreso apply to this published collection, not each story in it. But that is tangential to this discussion. Οἶδα (talk) 21:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is more than one review. McPhail (talk) 08:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of those reviews, except for LifeIsStory, are reviews of the book, with one sentence descriptions of the short story. That's not significant coverage. Also, LifeIsStory does not have clear editorial standards and appears to partner with book publishers, so it's independence and reliability are unclear at best. voorts (talk/contributions) 13:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are additional sources: 1, and 2. Jmj713 (talk) 17:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The USA Today story was already listed in the article. Horror Tree doesn't have any clear editorial policies. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like we have enough sources. I'm always supportive of more information, not merging/deleting articles, I don't see a point in that. Wikipedia is about information, not bureaucracy. Jmj713 (talk) 23:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Normally I would find myself in opposition to merges related to King, but I believe voorts is correct here. The reception section is considerably lacking. I would say it immediately fails WP:NBOOK #1 and fails the same concerns at WP:GNG. Οἶδα (talk) 21:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Despite being written by Stephen King, which alone makes it notable, the article has various notable sources. Can the article be written better? Of course so let's this pages some time to grow and expand before immediately trying to get rid of it. Jeremyeyork (talk) 18:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this extends beyond the article merely needing to be written better. It fails to establish general notability independent of You Like It Darker. It lacks significant coverage in reliable sources that exceeds trivial mention. Οἶδα (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense most mentions would be related to the collection, but we still have separate articles for most if not all of King's collected fiction. Jmj713 (talk) 20:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]