Talk:Bruce Cumings/Archives/2016

Reception

I find it hard to believe you cannot find a single quotation from a scholar who is supportive of Cumings' work. How did he become a chair at the University of Chicago if scholars universally consider his work "revisionist," "discredited," and exhibiting a "pro-North Korean bias?" For that matter, why does he enjoy publication in so many respected publications if he's a crackpot? I feel like there may be some cherry-picking going on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.49.210.238 (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The "Reception" section is so biased that it showcases the very same problem that the sources cited seem to have; I followed some of them and they are not even from those in the field, and the ones that are generally have just as much "bias" as Cummings. It is intended to pass that "crackpot" idea, at least that was what I got from the article before searching elsewhere. 2001:8A0:7E09:F601:A64E:31FF:FE95:9998 (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2016 (UTC)