Draft:How to Philosophize with a Hammer and Sickle
 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 2–3 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 672 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
| Submission declined on 12 December 2025 by Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of books). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
Comment: The article appears to fail WP:NBOOK. I searched on Google News and got no results. I also searched on Google Books and Google Scholar and got only this book as the result. I could not find anything in The Wikipedia Library's EBSCO search that matched strictly the title of this book. Z. Patterson (talk) 20:49, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: To the future reviewers the draft does not yet demonstrate clear notability under WP:NBOOK additional significant secondary sources are needed before acceptance. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 23:48, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Future reviewers, please discard my comment, I was confused with another tab I was in and out off. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 04:32, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment:
A source written by the author of the book cannot be used to establish notability. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 04:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
| Author | Jonas Čeika |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Genre | Philosophy |
| Published | 2021 |
| Publisher | Repeater Books |
| Media type | Print (softcover) |
| ISBN | 978-1913462499 |
How to Philosophize with a Hammer and Sickle: Nietzsche and Marx for the 21st- Century Left is a 2021 book by philosophy YouTuber Jonas Čeika attempting to synthesize the philosophies of Friedrich Nietzsche and Karl Marx.[1] Čeika describes the book as "not so much a synthesis" of Nietzscheanism with Marxism but rather a reading of the two philosophies against each other to bring out hidden aspects of each other.[2] The title is a play on Nietzsche's book Twilight of the Idols, or, How to Philosophize with a Hammer.
References
[edit]- ^ McLoughlin, Josh (21 June 2022). "Jonas Čeika and synthetic philosophy by Josh McLoughlin". The London Magazine.
- ^ McManus, Matt (28 January 2022). "Getting Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche Talking". Jacobin.