Talk:List of controversial books

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] First Edit?

I cleaned up the first chunk a bit, giving a more uniform sentence-like structure, and removing the periods at the end of the ones that still had them. I added a couple of descriptions to those that were missing them, and made some key terms into internal links. The words I chose to make into links were based on things that I could imagine a reader wanting to go more in-depth about, say, the casual Wikisurfer. I hope this helped.

Forgot to sign this previous entry.

Minidoxigirli 04:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unencyclopedic Tone

I'm a bit bothered by the unencyclopedic tone of this article. I think this is a good topic for a list, but an encyclopedia entry, even an introduction to a list, should not "sigh" at the reader and then direct contributors to please do this, please do that, etc. And apparently the purpose of this encyclopedia entry is for people to "express themselves"? It reads like a collective entry on a 'blog rather than an encyclopedic article.

Wikipedia policy states When you wonder what should or should not be in an article, ask yourself what a reader would expect to find under the same heading in an encyclopedia. I certainly don't expect to find an encyclopedia list of controversial books composed from "intentionally loose" criteria just so those who wrote the list can "express themselves." This introduction reads like a chatty instruction manual of somewhat arbitrary rules and restrictions. Wikipedia guidelines state Lists should always include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources, especially in difficult or contentious topics.

This article is a good idea, but it doesn't seem very well executed in its present form. I'd suggest a re-write of the introduction in a more polished, encyclopedic tone. 66.17.118.207 16:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] One Liners

What the hell does "NISM" mean? --192.156.102.6 21:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It means "Need I Say More". There are many points in the article that need to be cleaned up, and this needs to be closed to new users. It's open vandalism. Why they're targeting this article, I don't know.