Talk:Better World Books

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are certain bookselling companies (that will go unnamed) that buy back books for $1 or $2 just to keep them off the used market and then rip off the covers and throw them in the garbage, and it's a company wide rule. I'll let you do the searching there. Any book that Better World Books gets would be a book not in the landfill based on something like that. Just disgusting business practice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.240.144 (talk) 17:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This article states: "Environmental impact: Saved over 5,350 tons of books from landfills." Does that mean they go to landfills and dig out the books? If books are not wanted they are usually tossed in the paper recycling bin --- that's what we do at the library with damaged and unwanted books. Why would books go to landfills? And BWB is obviously a For-Profit Corporation - they say so on their website. --68.97.42.127 (talk) 02:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

How is it not a Non-Profit Organization, and also listed in the "Wikipedia entries of Non-Profit Organizations"? - 8472

Its a subsidiary of a giant corproation plating on the same theme as the supposedly green companies - the whole campaign for literacy is an advertising gimmick and there is nothing wrong with advertising gimmicks.

[edit] Systematical elimination of critical remarks

On September 19, 2006, an anonymous user (71.106.117.122) who exclusively wrote Wikipedia contributions on Better World Books, and only between September 7 and 20, 2006, deleted the parts of this article that were somewhat critical of the BWB enterprise, as can be seen here: [1], and also the sources of this article, without any reason given. If you look at the history of the article, you see it's a pattern. Several times referenced critical views were put in the article; they always were removed by User:Fritzlovesmaggie, who, like anonymous user 71.106.117.122, has been writing about BWB solely, and only between March 23, 2006 and October 2, 2006.

I'm going to restore the latest critical version, and add another reference (I came across BWB being a book buyer on Abebooks, and noticed BWB's woefully inadequate book descriptions and other hallmarks of a 'megalister' - this reference will tell you more about BWB as a megalister). Soczyczi 08:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Renamed sections/moved information for neutrality; left referenced critical remarks. Removed NPR references "Reports via NPR in January of 2006 state that yearly revenue is above 6 millions USD.", "In recent interviews by National Public Radio, the company refused to disclose its actual revenue or full donation allocations.", as not verifiable - search for “Better World Books” and "betterworldbooks.com" on NPR.org had no results. Corrected misnomer of “non-profit organization” as it is not. Literacy123 21:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maintaining Neutral Point Of View

Anonymous user 69.207.232.204, please refer to Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View, please avoid posting opinions as part of encyclopedia entry. Critical points of book listing are already addressed in article - see first sentence under "Online Sales" for megalister link, external links to NACS discussion & Independent Online Booksellers Association Newsletter's megalister Discussion. I edited to adhere to Wikipedia:Manual of Style, moving description of BWB under title, and edited impact section to include a critical POV. Please cite verifiable sources (refer to Wikipedia:Verifiability) for further edits. Thanks - Literacy123 13:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)