Talk:The New Meditation Handbook

Buddhism Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles

Sources[edit]

This is pretty badly sourced. Amazon blurbs are just that, publicity blurbs which may be untraceable or may be excerpts from longer reviews, with the 'good' bits cherry picked. Sources also need to be verifiable -- see WP:Verifiable, and just saying 'Kirkus Reviews' or worse yet, just a name, does not allow verification. Dougweller (talk) 12:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did a bit of cleanup. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising? Notability?[edit]

Wikipedia is not supposed to be a vehicle for advertising. This still seems pretty much like a publisher's blurb not an objective account or critical review. Can the person who created the article and made most of the edits reassure us he has no personal connection with the publisher, their parent organisation or the author? It also appears this book does not meet the notability criteria. A mention in Booklist or ForeWard does not make a book noteable. Lodru (talk) 11:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]