 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Fair use rationale for Image:Aztecbook.jpg edit
Image:Aztecbook.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Historical accuracy edit
The books contains too much inaccuracies to be considered a historical novel. Many of the stuff was made up by Jennings, and has nothing to do with the actual facts of the Aztecs. They should add that. --Surten (talk) 23:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Surten
- It's described as historical fiction, which is accurate. JubalHarshaw (talk)
Expansion edit
I love this book. I think the article needs to be expanded. It's very long, with a lot of depth. I'll take the project on, as soon as I have finished re-reading the novel (last time I read it was '93)JettisonCargo (talk) 17:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Although I cannot know how accurate the book is historically, I do think it is an excellent book. How it fails the "Notability" criterion is a mystery to me. It is very well written and interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.244.223.160 (talk) 08:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)