Talk:Man, Economy, and State

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Books Economics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: Libertarianism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Low-importance).

The contents of the Power and Market page were merged into Man, Economy, and State on 18 December 2023. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

This might sound like an immature comment, but here it goes. For being such a seminal work, that introduction sucks. If I ever get a chance, I'll see if I can improve it. If not, this would be something to consider adding to as a note to anybody who's interested. Lighthead ^þ 00:03, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is not original research to write a summary that merely describes a book's contents in shorter length, without attempting a literary analysis or anything like that. I believe WP:USEPRIMARY is on my side when it gives the example of a novel. It would be hard for an encyclopedia to cover books if they could not be described like I did, and there is no indication in the rules about original research that forbidding this was anything like the intent. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 00:50, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did an AI write the summary? Llll5032 (talk) 23:13, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]