Talk:The Monstrumologist

Plot summary
The plot summary is just insane. Over 3000 words? That's at least three times as long as it should be. There are a ton of direct quotes, which have no place in what should be a concise plot summary. The article is further bloated by all of the unnecessary citations to the book itself. Plot summaries do not need to be sourced if the information is pulled directly from the book and there's no reader interpretaton involved. (In which case we'd need to cite a reliable source that makes that interpretation for us.)

And then there's the reviews themselves. None of them are appropriately cited. They need to be completely and accurately sourced to the original publication. That would mean Publisher's Weekly, not the Barnes and Noble website that merely repeats what may be only a portion of the original review. Now, let's talk about that Amazon.com review, which I deleted entirely. Anonymous reviews submitted by users to sites like Amazon are not reliable sources that we can use in the article. (See WP:RS) Sorry, but we just can't cite Just Loves Books. I put in an appeal for help at Books WikiProject, but maybe somebody who's put in some work on this article could step up and start improving it. SesanaP (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC).