Talk:Nevillean theory of Shakespeare authorship: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:05, 8 April 2016 editIan.thomson (talk \| contribs)58,562 edits →Sources that help establish notability and should be incorporated for neutrality ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:23, 13 April 2016 edit undoMhhossein (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers24,833 edits AfD closed as keepNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Old AfD multi\|page=Nevillean theory of Shakespeare authorship\|date=28 March 2016\|result='''keep'''}}
	== Sources that help establish notability and should be incorporated for neutrality ==		== Sources that help establish notability and should be incorporated for neutrality ==

Revision as of 11:23, 13 April 2016

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 March 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

Hope, Warren; Holston, Kim (2009). The Shakespeare Controversy: An Analysis of the Authorship Theories (2nd. ed.). McFarland. pp. 128-129. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Edmondson, Paul; Wells, Stanley (2013). Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy. Cambridge UP. pp. 54-60. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Two of these I found accidentally while trying to find anything else by the publisher of The Truth Will Out, so I'm curious as to why they haven't appeared yet. @RalphWinwood: how did you not find these? Or if you did, why did you not incorporate them? Ian.thomson (talk) 03:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)