Talk:The Social Animal (Aronson book)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Social Animal (Aronson book) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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 articles

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I have removed the prod tag on this. This search finds over 500 books which refer to this book, excluding books by Aronson himself, so I think notability is clear. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article makes no mention of this, however, and has been a one line stub for four years. I'll tag it for expansion rather than deletion, but at some point it either needs to be fixed or deleted, since it's serving so useful purpose in its current form. — iridescent 13:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No information is far better than some information, since no information makes it seem like Wikipedia doesn't even want an article on it, while having only some information makes it seem like Wikipedia is an evolving, not perfect, work-in-progress encyclopedia. --131.111.213.39 (talk) 05:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]