Talk:Leviathan and the Air-Pump

Multiple Issues April 2012
Article is currently a chapter-by-chapter summary of the entire book. Very (very!) nicely done, but I don't think it's right for Wikipedia. Needs less paraphrasing of the book and OR interpretation, and more third-party sources. Publicly Visible (talk) 02:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Issues December 2020
Hi all, I am going to start working on this article. It has about a million reviews, some of which I added to further reading. The article should rarely if ever cite the book itself, that is what all the reviews are for. The reviews are secondary sources independent of the book and its authors, therefore they are reliable, the book and other content written by the authors is not reliable as they are not independent of the topic. Reviews that were not published need to be removed and reviews from non-notable persons should be given less weight (space) than reviews from notable persons. A great deal of original research needs to be removed and replaced with statements supported by the book's many reviews. I will work on it as I have time. Thanks! Footlessmouse (talk) 01:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * To really emphasize this, there are two articles I found published in 2017 in Isis that this whole article should be built on: "The Reviews of Leviathan and the Air-Pump : A Survey" and  "A Second Look: Leviathan and the Air-Pump : Editor's Introduction" everything else is supplementary information at this point. This is an ideal book article precisely because there is a tertiary source that has summarized the reception for us and extensive literature analyzing the book's style, themes, and content. There should be no primary sources used here at all. Footlessmouse (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2020 (UTC)