Talk:Dive Into Python

(I am not the author of this entry) - I came here to find out if Mark Pilgrim had written any other books because I found Dive into Python so refreshing. I can see why you say the entry reads like an advert, although actually it's more like a review and as such I find it fair and balanced. For example the reviewer warns "This assumption may place the book out of reach of the first-time software developer. Although Python is an excellent language to learn modern programming techniques, this book makes a difficult starting point"

(The previous post was made by 84.9.114.180) I think it does read like an advert, though that's not a terrible thing. This kind of page is quite easily turned into a Good Wikipedia Page. If I read this book, I'll come back and change it. --CalPaterson 10:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to say that this book is indeed noteworthy; It is probably the most recommended Python book on IRC, usenet, and Stack Overflow. It is also the most popular book I know of that is published under a free documentation license. I agree that more sources are required, however it can be hard to find "authoritative" sources for this kind of thing.Mark Merritt (talk) 18:53, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't this on wikibooks?

It's a review. it isn't even pretending to be anything else. Chris Cunningham 17:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising and/or Neutrality

I originally wrote the article. I have no connection at all to Mark Pilgrim. I attempted to describe my experience of a book I found extremely useful to getting beyond how to program Python as if it were C or FORTRAN. I believe what I have written here is accurate and not particularly biased. If this is better located on WikiBooks, I'm fine with having somebody move it. Given that the book can be freely downloaded from the internet (and the article links to the site), how does this resemble an ad? John Elder 10:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As an original piece of work it is in violation of Wikipedia's no original research policy, and as a subjective review it violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. I don't personally believe that it reads like an advert, but it certainly reads like a book review. Again, nobody is faulting the quality of the text itself nor accusing you of shilling for the author, but Wikipedia as a rule does not present articles from this perspective. If I see any pointers to a more appropriate place to post your work I'll link them here. Chris Cunningham 13:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did some editing and refractoring

Hopefully this has removed some of the 'review' from the article. The book is noteworthy as it is listed by Python.org as recommended [1] and many python programmers know of it (although I don't have any hard data on that). It is also sold at Barnes and Nobels, Amazon.com [2], and Borders [3] and many other bookstores. (Bjorn Tipling 03:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Now that's an advert! Well done. You even have a link to Amazon.