User talk:Neil Brick/Sandbox/Cult and Ritual Abuse (book): Difference between revisions
imported>Neil Brick |
imported>D. Matt Innis (→I regret the pattern: that's a good forum question) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:CZ can have books on many topics. I don't see a problem with this as long as the articles are accurate. [[User:Neil Brick|Neil Brick]] 03:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC) | :CZ can have books on many topics. I don't see a problem with this as long as the articles are accurate. [[User:Neil Brick|Neil Brick]] 03:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
::I think that is a good question, Howard. It probably should be on the forum, though. Do you want to start it? [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 03:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:26, 15 March 2009
The {{subpages}} template is designed to be used within article clusters and their related pages.
It will not function on User talk pages.
Article name
I'm thinking this article is going to need a rename because it is about a book. Maybe something like Cult and Ritual Abuse (book), but let's see what others think as well. D. Matt Innis 03:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- This is fine with me. Neil Brick 03:19, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I regret the pattern
I object to the pattern of importing book articles that argue that ritual abuse is widespread, but apparently cannot be challenged because they "merely report the book". Might I, then, keep producing articles about books that present only one view of an issue, until CZ is filled with them?
Further, literature is often associated with fiction. Should this book not be under the oversight of a social science workgroup? Howard C. Berkowitz 03:09, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- CZ can have books on many topics. I don't see a problem with this as long as the articles are accurate. Neil Brick 03:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think that is a good question, Howard. It probably should be on the forum, though. Do you want to start it? D. Matt Innis 03:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)