 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
This book has positive and negative reviews. Selection of reviews should reflect as much as possible a NPOV. It was the basis for a two-part Smithsonian program.
NPOV
editAnonymous user inserting reviews linked to unpublished essay.Kmccook (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
That is a lie. At the opening of the essay, it reads: Originally published in History Scotland 6.5 (Sept/Oct 2006). 2.51.43.8 (talk) 15:10, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
It is not bad faith or a lie. There was a link to an academia page which is a self-edited page. Put ina source to the original published article. The anonymous editor seems anxious to use the word "deplorable" in connection with the book.
It was originally published in a publication: History Scotland, which was then uploaded online. What is the issue with the sourcing? If you want, you can always add credible reviews praising Jim Webb's views, albeit if the historian's review is anthing to go by, it's extremely lacking in value. 2.51.43.8 (talk) 15:54, 12 December 2017 (UTC)