Talk:The Nigger Bible

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Nigger Bible article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

African diaspora Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

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

Untitled

Is it a novel, or is it a non-fiction book? -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:19, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV and encyclopedic style

This seems to me like a monumentally important work of american political literature. It was suggested to me today, and I was saddened to see such a limited article on the Book. In an initial, cursory attempt to take the presented information and move it to a more encyclopedic style, I was even more distraught to find almost no referenceable review material, or analyses online or even revered in tertiary material. It's like no one acknowledged this book, except by title and in praise in passing whilst discussing other books.

I hope the original contributor of the article and others can help to improve it, finding online reviews of hte book, analyses of its content and intention, etc. The text, as written, was unfortunately quite clearly an analysis and is subject to No Original Research rules and NPOV. Referring to the author's intent directly is risky (and yes, I did it - for lack of sources), as well as praising its own analyses, rather than describing them. Hopefully a more complete picture of this book can be brought to the table, with more scholarship. Heck, I'd even take self-published essays (which are mostly a no-no on Wikipedia) over no references and some boosting in the article.

Having read two chapters of the book now thanks to Amazon, I can say I truly hope this important book is better described on Wikipedia --Christian Edward Gruber 05:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]