Talk:Non-Nuclear Futures

Book contents described as reality
The article doesn't seem to distinguish between what's in the book (the authors' opinions) and empirical reality. For instance, the idea that centralized power generation requires "costly transmission and distribution systems" (which implies that "soft" alternatives do not) is a claim about reality. On any other Wikipedia page, such a claim could be challenged and removed if found to be unsupported, or balanced by alternative evidence if it were genuinely controversial. However, on a book-description page, one can simply say "Lovins' claim is in the book, and the refutation is not". It seems like a way of ignoring the non-POV rules.

Perhaps this article could at least have a criticism section. 184.70.186.150 (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)