Talk:Empire of Illusion

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

Culture

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture 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.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Made page

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The description of the contents of the book may appropriately be called overlong and in some conflict with WP:PRIMARY guidelines, but I do believe it does not misrepresent the source material in any significant way and thus avoids the usual major issues with WP:SYNTH. It's a fairly chronological description of the contents of the work that is broken up by each chapter. In that way, the text is easily verifiable. If this is an egregious sin that must be undone, I've made a similar exposition on book contents over in the Death of the Liberal Class page that might also be of interest for correcting. I, however, think they're all more or less okay; but I'm biased because they are my own beautiful works. Mewnst (talk) 16:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

There's a danger of WP:SYNTH in what you've written. I believe the content section should include supporting references, even if some of them have to come from the book itself. Deb (talk) 08:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Feedback from New Page Review process

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice work.

North8000 (talk) 13:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic