Talk:Underland (book)
Latest comment: 9 months ago by SFC9394 in topic No synopsis, excessive reviews
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Underland (book) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
No synopsis, excessive reviews
editThis is one of the most remarkable articles I've seen in a while, if only because of the juxtaposition between the high standard of editing and complete lack of useful information. There are reams of tables of reviews and other superfluous material, but no synopsis - not even a single sentence. This is an article that somehow manages to contain 108 references and a 34 item 'further reading' list without saying anything about the actual subject of the article. The whole thing reads like a postmodern parody. I'm in awe. Retinalsummer (talk) 14:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed, came here to say the same thing, an utterly bizarre article. So I was just bold and removed almost all of it. I don't know what that was, publishers promotional work, or someone cultivating a position? No idea. It is all gone, and I provided a basic description of the book, which is much more likely why someone would be landing on the article than reading about the 42 prizes it was nominated for. SFC9394 (talk) 20:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)