![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Changing wording. It says the book "reveals" this but I'm uncertain of this books conclusions, and I am sure there are others as well. "Reveals" indicates that the propositions are fact, which I don't think they are. Changing to "proposing." MrKeith2317 ( talk) 18:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The criticism section seems like original research to me, or more specifically, "synthesis of published material that advances a position". The works cited aren't reacting to Grossman's book - in some cases, that'd be physically impossible, since they were published before it - they just happen to contain statements that are at odds with his thesis. Aquila89 ( talk) 17:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Since this article is about Grossman's book, it is improper to include general criticisms or reviews or views unless they are specifically addressed to what Grossman has said in the book. Such criticisms are certainly proper in other articles that talk about the subject. This limitation is not directed towards what other authors have said about the subject, even if they are contrary to what Grossman thinks. Rather, the limitation simply requires us to focus this article on its' subject – the book titled On Killing.-- S. Rich ( talk) 00:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I encourage IP 80.193.152.229 to work on this, but certain limitations apply. IP's proposed addition (now reverted) cites work by Richard Dawkins from 1976. Clearly Dawkins was not discussing Grossman's book. We cannot allow this particular article about a specific book to become a forum for discussing or elaborating on "Killogy" in general. If there are specific criticisms of Grossman, then those criticisms (and only those) are appropriate.-- S. Rich ( talk) 17:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Changing wording. It says the book "reveals" this but I'm uncertain of this books conclusions, and I am sure there are others as well. "Reveals" indicates that the propositions are fact, which I don't think they are. Changing to "proposing." MrKeith2317 ( talk) 18:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The criticism section seems like original research to me, or more specifically, "synthesis of published material that advances a position". The works cited aren't reacting to Grossman's book - in some cases, that'd be physically impossible, since they were published before it - they just happen to contain statements that are at odds with his thesis. Aquila89 ( talk) 17:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Since this article is about Grossman's book, it is improper to include general criticisms or reviews or views unless they are specifically addressed to what Grossman has said in the book. Such criticisms are certainly proper in other articles that talk about the subject. This limitation is not directed towards what other authors have said about the subject, even if they are contrary to what Grossman thinks. Rather, the limitation simply requires us to focus this article on its' subject – the book titled On Killing.-- S. Rich ( talk) 00:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I encourage IP 80.193.152.229 to work on this, but certain limitations apply. IP's proposed addition (now reverted) cites work by Richard Dawkins from 1976. Clearly Dawkins was not discussing Grossman's book. We cannot allow this particular article about a specific book to become a forum for discussing or elaborating on "Killogy" in general. If there are specific criticisms of Grossman, then those criticisms (and only those) are appropriate.-- S. Rich ( talk) 17:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)