Talk:Taken by Force (book)

Reliable source
This article, as the book, contains some very strong statements and as such requires secondary reliable sources to verify them, per WP:V. Including the book itself (a primary source) in the "Further reading" section does not constitute adequate sourcing. Of the three "external links" two of them appeared completely irrelevant before the recent clarification. Furthermore, the first one is a newspaper editorial, hence not considered reliably Wikipedia standards, while the second does not mention either the book or its author.radek (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've expanded a bit, found a second review, added an infobox (eliminating the "further reading" section) and put in a brief synopsis. I'll be using the Drayton reference as well.  One thing I'm noticing from that article is apparently the publication history goes back to 2001, not 2007.  One thing I would very much like to see would be the Morrow review, of which I've only got maybe 20 words from the preview - if anyone can get me a pdf I'd be grateful.  I've attributed where I think it was appropriate, and the book does seem notable.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 15:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)