Talk:Treason by the Book

absurd
It's ridiculous to say this article cites no sources, because it is a summary of a book, ergo, the book is the source for all the assertions. The real question is: is a book summary a legitimate entry? I would say no. The article should be focussed on the plot against the emperor, and then rewritten using not just Spence, but other sources as well. If the summary writer doesn't feel like undertaking the work, then delete the entry.

Theonemacduff (talk) 00:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The book merits its own article provided there have been non-trivial reviews. There are quite a few. Perspicaris (talk) 22:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Treason by the Book. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141227190025/http://www.wenxueboke.cn/book/book.asp?id=bkbk641138 to http://www.wenxueboke.cn/book/book.asp?id=bkbk641138

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)