Talk:James Rachels

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

This is a word-by-word copy of the biography on the official website. Raybrower 16:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This thing is not a bio article. It's a piece of sycophantic hagiography. Definite POV bias.

Rachel's book was the textbook for a class in Ethics I studied. Pretty good little textbook, I never grasped the Animal rights chapter by the guy at NC State Univ. After that class I decided I was a social contract guy and that utility, egoism, and all the rest are just dumb, lol. It was a sufficiently memorable class that I remembered the author's name and looked it up on wikipedia over ten years later. So he died huh? I'm sorry to hear it. such a cold feeling a cold dead intellectual. I had a Differential Equations class with a professor I knew to be dying. What affected me was his relaxed attitude, the whole class felt like cold slinky old person skin. cu James Rachels.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.89.72 (talk) 09:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity of "The Elements of Moral Philosophy"[edit]

The article makes this claim: "This introduction to ethics has sold over 750,000 copies and may well be the best-selling book in all of philosophy.", which is obviously false. Disregarding the merits of various philosophical books altogether, it is a simple fact that books like Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance sold way more copies. If we're going to take classics by for example Plato and Aristotle into account, then the claim is even more absurd. Stefan Kruithof (talk) 11:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:JamesRachels.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:JamesRachels.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:JamesRachels.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]