Talk:A Return to Love

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 28 June 2019, see discussion.
keep, June 30th 2006, see discussion.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Created page for "A Return to Love"

In attempting to edit the Marianne Williamson article, it occurred to me that A Return to Love indeed deserves its own article because the book is the most successful book of ACIM interpretation, and one of the most successful self-help/New Thought books of all time. That in itself makes the book notable. As I mention on the page (a cited and quoted mention, by the way), this book gained Marianne Williamson time on Oprah, 20/20, and was Publisher's Weekly's best seller for about 10 weeks. That in itself makes the book notable.

Marianne Williamson is the author of many other books, but in my opinion only this first one is notable and deserves its own page. Every subsequent book by Marianne Williamson has carried the notice "By the author of A Return to Love". I think it is fine to mention her bibliography on her own personal page, but I think that this one book in particular deserves its own page.

There are certain books that have had deep impacts within certain genres and deserve their own pages aside from the page devoted to the other. For example, Melody Beattie has her own page, and so does the book Codependent No More. I think we have a similar situation with Marianne and Return to Love. -- Andrew Parodi 08:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two can easily be covered in a single article, since Williamson appears to be notable solely for this book and its promotion. Just zis Guy you know? 21:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could slap a merge tag on it for further discussion when the AfD has run its course. Eusebeus 22:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But I think that as this book is the main book of her career, it should stand on its own. This is the book that made her famous, and it remains the only truly notable book (or product) of her career. There are some books that stand on their own, I think. There are some books that are popular regardless of the author (A Return to Love falls in here), and then books that are dependent upon the author's reputation (I believe all her following books fall in here).

I think the simple fact that this book was basically an Oprah pick and stayed atop the best seller's list for so long makes it notable. -- Andrew Parodi 03:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old link

the previously removed page

Fair use rationale for Image:Returntolove.jpg

Image:Returntolove.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please merge with the author page

Please merge with the author page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Marianne_Williamson --Lance W. Haverkamp (talk) 19:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]