Talk:Tom Harpur

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

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Untitled[edit]

The link to Holding's article should probably be removed. I've read it, and unfortunately it is very sloppy work and would probably drive more people into Harpur's corner. I would welcome a decent critique of Harpur's The Pagan Christ (of the links here, I've so far only read Holding's), but Holding is not up to the task. His effort is embarrassing.

at my count there are currently seven links to critical reviews of harpur. I have been led to beleive that these links should be balanced. Unfortunatly there don't seem to be any positive reviews that I can find. I'll look around to find the most well written ones that I can and I'll put them up and take down some of the critical ones. Unless anyone has a problem.--Matt D (talk) 22:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above. In the interest of balance I've removed Holding's article. Following Wiki policy, I've removed one History New Network link, that of Barry Henaut, which not only appears to repost material under copyright, but is selective in what is included. Victoriagirl (talk) 00:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Casey's 2014 comments about Harpur's work indicate wide and scathing academic rejection of his best known book, a Critical reception section seems to be called for. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]