Talk:Tristan Needham

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template. If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page. If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

The description "highly original" for Needham's book, whilst possibly true, appears unnecessary and too subjective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.49.229 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 26 October 2006

I disagree. It's the defining characteristic of the book. Indeed, if the book were not original, there is no reason to have an article on Needham. I added references to two reviews which show that it's not subjective. I think it's okay to say that the book is highly original, but if necessary, we could go for the more weasel-y "the book is considered to be highly original". -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the addition of the citation to the review. This justifies the use of "highly original". With the citation, I don't believe it necessary to go as far as "is considered to be highly original".

Just surveying the other books on complex analysis in libraries and bookstores pretty much validates that claim.DivisionByZer0 03:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

"Unorthodox" would be more accurate. By and large, the book simply popularizes ideas due to Penrose, rather than promulgating anything new. For Penrose's version, see "The Road to Reality."