Talk:The Good Book (book)

Why reverted?
Just curious -- why have two editors reverted, without an edit summary, the external link of the IP? The link looks okay to me (although it should have been put in the references section instead of its own "Links" section). When reverting something that is not obviously vandalism, please give the reason in an edit summary. Thanks. Duoduoduo (talk) 14:28, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Observer review
We read: Reviews in The Observer and Private Eye satirised the book for its arbitrary rejection of religious content and the proselytising of the author. No link is given for the review in the Eye, but this is not how I read the review in the Observer. Clearly the reviewer in the latter is dissatisfied with the book, and clearly he's being humorous, but I see no satire of the book for its rejection, whether arbitrary or not, of religious context; and nothing about the proselytising of the author (if anything, the author is presented as the reverse). Am I missing something in the review? -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The Observer review is certainly satire, though it's not clear to me that the reviewer is dissatisfied with the book -- anyone could have written that. But to say that the satire is for its "arbitrary rejection of religious content and the proselytising of the author" is sheer fabrication -- the review contains no such thing.


 * More broadly, it seems clear to me that the editor who wrote the criticism section has a POV agenda; so I think that everything in that section should be checked carefully. Also, the section misuses the phrase "critical review" or "critical reception" when what is meant is "negative" -- "critical" actually means "having to do with literary criticism, both pro and con". Duoduoduo (talk) 15:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

subject of the king smart: with opions, education, and a few lies.
Quasi (which means not real) Municipal Government (?). Operating Ultra Vires (which means with out power or authority). the sma using the word (federal) which means the same privatized at the multible states. the lack of the ANSI/NIST - ITL1-update 2013 required use of bimetric,eye and voice data with verification with the annnex orbiting, and non devices for confermation of each of our identites. Of course the public school cirlicume government study, should includ American Jurisprudence, (remenber hey jude and dear prudence.) ya so the bettles brian washed us. for our attoney General not to deal with it and have each state have their own paper printing plant (called the treasury). treasury appropreated expenditures, ( they call taxes taking our money)the government having that right if they did not violate the state and national constitution and install the municipal stautes and jails against the people. enough over load you you this time. (religion) another time. JPC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.245.225.177 (talk) 21:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on The Good Book (book). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430172150/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23938503-the-king-james-bible-bashers.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23938503-the-king-james-bible-bashers.do
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807005628/http://www.spectator.co.uk/books/6915428/when-wailing-is-appropriate.thtml to http://www.spectator.co.uk/books/6915428/when-wailing-is-appropriate.thtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131215202218/http://www.firstthings.com/article/2011/11/amiable-atheism to http://www.firstthings.com/article/2011/11/amiable-atheism

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)