Talk:How the Irish Saved Civilization

Untitled

My contribution to this article may have had some flaws but I do not think you improved it. In my opinion it would have been an improvement if you had modified the main imperfections and/or added some counterarguments in favour of the book. As far as I can see, my article does not read like an essay but like an extremely well-researched and well-referenced review about a bad book. The original article was a stub, and there was a request by wikipedia to help improve it by expanding it. Moreover, Wikipedia is on the lookout for new authors and asks them "to be bold". If this is what happens to new authors on en.wikipedia, it is small wonder that there is a shortage of them. I have published stuff on de.wikipedia without any problems. Please show some respect for my work, which was extremely time-consuming. Alienllama (talk) 18:39, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it might be up to others to decide whether your contributions are "extremely well-researched and well-referenced". However, original research is not acceptable. It is good that you are bold, but please note that Wikipedia:Be bold says "Don't get upset if your bold edits get deleted." In any case, I stand by my initial assertion that amazon reviews are inappropriate. I'm sorry your initial experience has been frustrating, but I should point out that some of the material you added has been retained in the article. StAnselm (talk) 04:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

---

So how did they save what civilization

Could someone add one or two sentences on how civilization was saved by the Irish. The claim seems absurd - and the text as of now only repeats that they did it ... it's even unclear what is meant with 'civilization'.-Thomas (talk) 09:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC)