Talk:Hell and High Water (book)

Critical Response

The paragraph recounting the Toronto Star's review seems to be picking up quotes from Romm himself, which may well have been included in the review but which do not really constitute citing the review. I'd prefer to see something in the reviewer's own words. Birdbrainscan 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I found the original review on the web. I've added a link to it at the end of the paragraph in question. On a closer read, it looks like this excerpt does indeed pick up the reviewer's own words. So I'll withdraw the above comment.Birdbrainscan 17:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The link to the review was always there under "References" at the bottom of the article. Now it's there twice. Is that right? -- Ssilvers 18:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hell+HighWater.jpg

Image:Hell+HighWater.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Categories

I have removed the following categories twice:

• Category:Political books
• Category:Climate change assessment and attribution
• Category:Climate change feedbacks and causes
• Category:Carbon finance
• Category:Sustainable technologies
• Category:Climate change policy
• Category:Global warming
• Category:Energy policy

This is a case of over-categorisation. Also, they are all redundant since it is in Category:Climate change books. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 19:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Would you please explain why each category is incorrect? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Except for the political book category, which I note that you have reinstated, they are all redundant since the book is in the Climate change book category. If we were to add this book to the categories above then we might as well add all the other climate change books. This will clutter up the categories and make the categories less useful as a navigational tool. The political book category is a little marginal. Some argue that everything is political! Cliamte change is certainly politically charged at present. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The book focuses a lot on the politics of, and political response to, Global Warming science, particulary with reference to the Bush administration. It's definitely a "political book" as much as a "science book". -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hell and High Water (book). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928120715/http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/7/18/05333/6994 to http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/7/18/05333/6994

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)