Talk:Children's literature criticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Children and Young Adult Literature Portal This article is part of WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to children's and young adult literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project.
???	This article has not yet received a type classification.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Tasks you can do: WikiProject Children's Literature Open Tasks Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to Children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks. Update: Author Biography articles and write about new books written for children Expand: Subsections of articles relating to Children's Literature Create new articles relating to Children's Literature Add this template ( {{Children'sLiteratureWikiProject}} ) to the talk pages of articles relating to Children's Literature. Expand and Edit Portal:Children and Young Adult Literature Cooperate with Wikipedians belonged to similar WikiProjects Discuss matters involving Children's literature on this wikiproject's talk page Cleanup the Philip Ardagh article. edit

[edit] references

I know in general people find super-long bibliographies to be a negative in wikipedia pages. Yet since this article is about theory -- and controversial theory at that, since many people don't believe the topic exists as a serious scholarly field (and child-centric and text-centric theorists often disagree about what's been said) -- I feel the references are necessary. On the other hand, much of this information is duplicated in Nodelman (2005). What do people think? Keep the endless list of references?

I just hate how defensive children's lit scholars always have to be. "Look, we're real! See! Publications!" Deborah-jl 14:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)