Talk:The Road to Serfdom

POV
I am quite disturbed by what I found here. If you have some valid criticism, cite it, but the wikipedia is not to have an editorial bias, especially not to the exclusion of needed info. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 12:18, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

NPOV dispute
I'm going to be removing the header soon, unless someone objects. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 20:53, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Good idea. This is Hayek's book, so I don't see any problem in that this article describes his POV. Few wikilinks are good enough for opposing views, there is no need to duplicate material that exists in other socialism articles here. jni 07:16, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Be aware that this article is subject to POV reverts, have a look at this edit, or this one. While we can remove the dispute, we cannot insure it won't be needed again when such edits are reinserted... I'll wait a bit longer, and remove it, but... I'd ask that you keep an eye on this page :)


 * [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Wants you to vote!]] 10:51, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Road to Serfdom. 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://archive.is/20130415224932/http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/friedrich-a-hayek-a-centenary-appreciation/ to http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/friedrich-a-hayek-a-centenary-appreciation/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080202062716/http://culturalshifts.com/archives/224 to http://culturalshifts.com/archives/224

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) 20:21, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Cautions and clarifications
The first sentence of this section is editorializing and non-verifiable (i.e. whether Hayek is "clear" when read in full. Clear to whom?). I think it should be deleted.

Aside from the unnecessary part about when Hayek lived, the rest of the paragraph is non-verifiable (i.e. that the work is timeless) or editorializing (i.e. that readers need to read history first). I recommend the entire paragraph be deleted.

Overall the section reads like an apology for Hayek. The cited items seem relevant but I wonder if they could be included in a separate section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.120.140.241 (talk) 05:44, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree. I have gone ahead and done this. --Jaydavidmartin (talk) 01:57, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Problems with the summary
Hayek discusses Johann Plenge but has not been mentioned in the summary? Leutha (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2022 (UTC)