This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion
The "Critical Response" section is one of the most one-sided pieces of writing I've ever seen at Wikipedia. Almost all of the citations are from right wing sources that support Harsanyi; the only "critical response" mentioned is from anonymous fulminating letter writers, framed to make them look bad. -- Jibal (talk) 01:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Jibal, I've deleted a couple of the reviews that I think were the most biased. I included all the negatives that I was able to find, and you are free to add negative reviews. The problem is that his work is so very seldom reviewed, let alone by liberal sources, and Wikipedia editors are required to write from published secondary sources. I look forward to your contributions. −− Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 15:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Here are two possible sources reviewing his latest booK;
