Talk:Eminent Historians: Their Techniques, Their Line, Their Fraud

message: Removed this text from the article mainspace. I am anxious that it may be libellous and want time to check it out. 
He also says that the historian Tasneem Ahmad obtained a Ph.D. and published a book in his name that was only a copy of an earlier work by Dr. Parmatma Saran. According to Shourie, "the entire manuscript has been lifted word for word from the work of Dr. Parmatma Saran." The foreword to that book was written by the "very eminent" Irfan Habib, who according to Tasneem Ahmad "encouraged and guided me at every stage of the work" and examined "with care every intricate problem , arising out [sic.] during the course of work." 
::I have reverted those edits. This article merely reports that this book by shourie makes those accusations.-Bharatveer 04:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Allegation of plagiarism

message: Arts and Humanities citation index is  not  dependable source of information about the number of citations--It is an index to journal articles, not books, and it is very incomplete, listing only those from a few journals. See WebofScience. I suggest checking in Book Review Digest, and in a general index such as Proquest or the equivalent. (Or first Google Scholar. which might well have some)DGG (talk) 01:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AHCI

message: our guideline on book articles:
A book is generally notable if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria: 
# The book has been the subject (The "subject" of a work means non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the book, its author or of its publication, price listings and other nonsubstantive detail treatment) of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself,  with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary.
#* The immediately preceding criterion excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. 
# The book has won a major literary award.
# The book has been made or adapted with attribution into a motion picture that was released into multiple commercial theaters, or was aired on a nationally televised network or cable station in any country.
# The book is the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools,  universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country. 
# The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable. 
I am not sure which item we want to argue applies here. Obviously not (1) -- we have one brief and extremely unfavourable newspaper review. No award either. No motion picture. Hardly a "subject of instruction". What remains is the implicit claim that  Shourie "is so historically significant that any of his  works may be considered notable". I have serious misgivings about such a claim. Failing that, this should be turned into a redirect to the biography article. dab (𒁳) 08:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:BK]]