On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Surreptitiousness <surreptitious.wikiped...@googlemail.com> wrote: > FT2 wrote: >> The issue for fiction can be summed up within with one question, almost. >> Here is a nice simple book. Obviously any /analysis/ will be from good >> quality sources. But what kind of sourcing is appropriate to its plot >> summary? Many well-read books don't have plot summaries in reliable sources, >> and yet "anyone reading the book can see what its basic plot is", and we >> have hundreds of editors to reach consensus on what it says. >> >> (Key issue: any book is a primary source on its own contents.) >> > You've misread me. The key question is, why should we summarise this > plot. That's what's causing the problems with fiction on Wikipedia at > the minute. Although having said that, the drama does seem to have died > off a bit lately. Which kind of suggests a consensus of sorts exists.
I think plot summaries are OK, as long as there is some real-world context and analysis. Just a description of what the book is about is not enough. Links to reviews and criticism is a must, in my view. Some examples would help here, from stubs, to "only" plot summary (more like a directory of books), to "mixtures" to "featured articles about books" (we have a few of those). Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
