Talk:Escape from Paradise

Reliability of the article?

Just wanted to note that the article may be borderline NPOV as most of the info is sourced from the book itself (which itself tries to hype up the controversy factor). The book, though non-fiction, was still written from the perspective of a party with vested interest. As such, I amended it slightly to note that point (that the contents were from the perspective of the author).

Also like to clarify about the book being restricted from borrowing; under Singapore's library systems (as with many others), the book is shelved within the reference section/departments where books within can be read in the library but cannot be borrowed and removed from the premises. Whether it is done on purpose or design cannot be verified, but I've changed the text so that it is more neutral in tone. Zhanzhao (talk) 05:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Major cleanup

I removed the following sections for the following reasons.

- Mention of reviews were removed because they were not reviews. The links given were interviews with the book's subject which also happened to mention that a book had been written about her. Stating that the book was reviewed by many publications internationally seems to be an attempt at promoting the book.

- Section about the X10 IPO is dubious in nature and arguably COATRACK. The links given were either from the books own website, which is written in a mocking manner, or does not show reflect the content it is supposed to substantiate. I.e. There is no link stating that X10 is bankrupt, or that the SEC had prevented the IPO because of the alleged letters submitted by the auhors of the book to the SEC. Stating that it is so would be OR. The fact that much of the claims are being sourced from the books website, making it a PRIMARY source. Which itself clearly does not seem to be written seriously or seems to have an axe to grind with the people mentioned in the article. Which in turn invokes BLP issues.

If the content is to be readded, please find reliable tertiary or secondary sources that would pass the reliable source rest, and phrase it in a way that follows Wikipedia's rules on COATRACK, OR and BLP. Zhanzhao (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Escape from Paradise. 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://web.archive.org/web/20051120065343/http://libraryjournal.com/article/CA374952.html to http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA374952.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:22, 14 October 2017 (UTC)