Talk:The Coming Insurrection

Point of View

This article isn't written from a neutral point of view at all. This text is not "pro communist" or "Marxist". The statement that "the authors believe that the best way to push countries with socialist system governments into a system of communism is with a brief period of anarchy in-between" is false. Vericuester (talk) 06:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I edited the article for neutrality as much as I could. Vericuester (talk) 06:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

It could be intrested to speak about Julien Coupat, suposed to be linked to the book. Ecureuil espagnol (talk) 11:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

not censored

I replaced "samizdat" with "bootleg" since the book has never been censored or banned by the US or Canadians government, which the term "samizdat" implies. Lokifer (talk) 02:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Too much Glen Beck?

I think Glen Beck's views get rather too much space in this article. There surely must be political scientists or other academics, or even media commentators with a different viewpoint, no? - An Duine Gruamach — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.63.41 (talk) 21:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree that without other perspectives, the article would seem tilted towards Beck's opinion, and the opinion of his like-minded guests. The only reason why Beck currently has such an outsized space on this article is because I found a large amount by him-- not because his opinion is so important. We shouldn't omit the section on his interpretation and reaction to the book, so I don't encourage reducing any of what is currently present. Just add whatever you can find to a new section on responses from others.--Cast (talk) 04:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Glenn Beck just shouldn't be in this article at all — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.236.132.56 (talk) 00:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

He's there because here are sources for him to be here. Again, there is no attempt being made here to give him undue weight. The problem is simply that we don't have many other sources for commentary on the book, but when they become available we can round out this article, putting Beck's commentary into context as one interpretation of the book among others. --Cast (talk) 22:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

What a crock. Just because information can be referenced doesn't automatically make it useful or worth adding. Has Beck ever mentioned what kind of vegetables he likes with his dinner? Why don't you people go run over and try to add three or four paragraphs mentioning every time, place and circumstance under which Beck mentioned Carrots to that article, see how long it takes for you to get banned. And this information would hardly be illuminating if it were in Glenn Beck's page. Where, strangely enough for all of the mentions here about how it's a central part of his thinking about the Radical Left, and this and that, and bla bla bla, on Beck's page the book is only mentioned once, as one of many books that Beck regularly cites and once urged his readers to buy. That's it over there. Meanwhile, over here, you put a goddamn picture of Glenn Beck here?!? Are you people insane? I defy you to find another article on this wiki about a book, where a critic of the book has their picture on the page. This isn't just giving undue weight to a fringe conspiracy theorist, this is a travesty.

I have condensed the entire section down to, "Glenn Beck, host of The Glenn Beck Program, has at various times referred to the book as, "crazy" and "evil". Beck has also urged his viewers to order the book online themselves, so as to better understand what he claimed were the thoughts of leftist radicals." Removed the picture... And moved his reaction up to the Reactions section. Undo this edit it at your peril. 67.49.113.72 (talk) 05:01, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Coming Insurrection. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090821064956/http://www.hollywoodreporter.com:80/hr/content_display/features/interviews_profiles/e3i85f38c299a3a459a9f350da8eb4a3674 to http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/features/interviews_profiles/e3i85f38c299a3a459a9f350da8eb4a3674

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

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:21, 28 January 2016 (UTC)