Talk:The Collected Poems of Freddy the Pig

Notability

There are notable aspects to this, roughly twice as many as needed to establish Wiki notability, one might say. The major problem is lack of documentation. It's more of a stub, than a non-notable.

• While other books in the "Freddy" series are known and readily available in public libraries, this particular book is not. That's not a reflection on its quality. It's simply not widely available, not as popular as the other books in the series, and hence documentation is difficult to come by. If all the other books in the series are notable, it suggests this one is.

• The author of the published biography on Walter R. Brooks "Talking Animals and Others" puts considerable emphasis on poetry in the "Freddy" books. This book is in part a collection of those poems.

• In this book are new illustrations by Kurt Wiese, who won two Caldecotts and a Newbery Award in his life's work. Illustrations from a notable imply the book is notable.

• The book has new poems by Brooks.

Less compellingly, but still important, are other factors:

• Brooks intended this work to be given scholarly treatment with explanatory notes. It may be that his failing health prevented this. In any event, there is some expectation that there is more significance to the collection than appears superficially.

• The book is labeled in sources as part of the "Freddy" series. Certainly readers will be curious about a book which is considered part of the series, yet is uniquely difficult to find.

• I've done a certain amount of research on the series, and "The Collected Poems of Freddy the Pig" is by far the most difficult to research. As a stub, the article is an invitation for others who have cogent information to contribute.

Regards, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 05:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

The problem is, none of these points are addressed in the prose of the article; you need to assert the book's notability, else readers cannot tell how it is any worthier of inclusion than any random children's book. Add an assertion of notability, preferably sourced, or if not tag it with citation needed, and also apply a stub template to it. BlazerKnight (talk) 11:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Good input. A stub template has been added, and a sentence clarifying that there is some new Brooks material, and well as new Wiese illustrations. (I've never intentionally written a stub, so it simply didn't occur to me to label it.) As for the "scholarly treatment", there is a published hardcopy source (as well as, it seems, an extant letter from Brooks); however I don't have access to it, and source was a too vague about what happened to make a particularly definitive statement. I may be reduced to buying the book to wring out a couple extra Wikipedia facts. (It's the only "Freddy" book that I've never read entirely.) Regards, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 20:03, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I found a couple pieces of information that I had mislaid. The review as quoted is incomplete; if someone could find the whole thing that would be useful. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2010 (UTC)