Talk:The 10 Big Lies About America

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

With more than four million listeners weekly and the host of one of the top ten radio shows in America Michael Medved is a noteworthy American author/commentator on American culture and history. His success as an author is indisputable. Writing non-fiction material should not require further "real-world-context". Imperium Sine Fine (talk) 00:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should read Wikipedia:WikiProject Books/Non-fiction article, as well as the general guidelines about notability and reliable sources. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 01:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article makes dubious claims such as "the Founding Fathers were very religious" based on no authority but the author's. The best remedy would be to change the article so it is simply about the book, not repeating its content. rspεεr (talk) 07:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is pretty much one wiki editors interpretation of the book (original research) with no sources claimed beyond the author's website and an ISBN reference (primarysources). Unless reliable sources are provided that validate these summations, the entire article needs to be radically pruned and brought up to notability and article guidelines. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is only five days old. Give it some time, and it will have reliable sources that "validate" it. Imperium Sine Fine (talk) 20:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, if anyone reading this knows of any way to improve this article, then could you please write some suggestions? Or explain how the article could be improved? Imperium Sine Fine (talk) 23:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to misunderstand the purpose of references in cases like this. You are finding ones that support the premise of the book. You need to find ones that analyze the book itself. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 00:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By analyze, what do you mean? Imperium Sine Fine (talk) 00:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broadly speaking, reviews. It's doubtful if there are any academic papers about it. Our purpose is not to bring our personal opinions about what the book says, it is to collect what others have said about it. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 01:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I'm sorry. I'm fairly new here.

How do think I could go about doing this? Imperium Sine Fine (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

The above should get you started. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 01:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I second 98.248.33.198's doubt that there will be any academic papers specifically about this book, it may receive case study mention in academic looks at the book's genre or in the role of conservative radio in the United States. It would be worth a search in media studies and communications journals, maybe even political science journal databases. Other good sources might be found in newspaper review sections, or any major media outlet that has given a review of the book. You may want to read our guidelines on reliable sources to better understand what types of media sources would be usable. Blogs are usually not acceptable sources.

For guidelines on what an article like this might look like, see WikiProject Books's non-fiction guidelines. They're sketchy, but may be helpful. For examples of featured articles about non-fiction books, see The World Without Us and The Slave Community. Both were passed fairly recently and should illustrate current standards for articles like this. Notice how long the synopsis sections are in each article versus coverage of reactions to the book and other information. If you need any help with this article, please don't hesitate to ask. --Danger (talk) 01:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, somebody articulate and willing to help has arrived! (Unlike myself, at least the articulate bit.

) Thanks, Danger. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 01:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]