Talk:Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point

Untitled
Some reviews that IMHO would satisfy WP:RS:

Also, article title should be just "Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point" per WP:CONCISE. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 03:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.nature.com/articles/383228a0
 * https://www.jstor.org/stable/688147 maybe?
 * Lebowitz, Joel. "Time's arrow and Archimedes' point, by Huw Price." Physics Today 50, no. 1 (1997): 68-69.
 * Reviews in Times Literary Supplement, Times Higher Education Supplement, New Scientist, any other prominent mainstream media

Also also, per WP:RSPRIMARY, "Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources", so any summary of the book should preferably be brief, or based on the secondary sources (such as book reviews), or both. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 03:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC) =Old Comments= These were some old comments on the header of the draft that I have moved here for posterity:

=Why I published the article= Thanks to ReaderofthePack for their comments. I believe I have addressed the concerns raised:
 * 1) I have added a 'Release' section
 * 2) I have added a sentence common elements to reviews in the 'Reception' section
 * 3) I have not changed the chapter-by-chapter nature of the summary. If someone wants a general overview, they can read the header paragraph, which provides just that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfredsph (talk • contribs) 10:42, 1 April 2021 (UTC)