I decided I hadn't reviewed a featured article candidate for a while
and Russell T Davies (writer of the Doctor Who reboot) was there.
Figured I'd give it a go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_T_Davies
I invite you to look, with reasonable care, at references 1 to 97.
Now, not only are they from the same source but it would appear the
page numbers are almost all accounted for (although I don't know how
long the book is, but I'm willing to guess it's c.219 pages long). And
the pages are ref'd in pretty much book order.
In short, were I Aldridge & Murray I think I would be feeling pretty
hard done by at this point.
I should say, I don't have the book and that would be key before
making a point too vehemently. Nevertheless, I wonder if we have a
policy/guideline on appropriate levels of source mining?
I have another interest in this. I recently purchased a book on WWI.
The centenary is coming up in 2014 and there is a desire to get our
WWI articles in good shape before then. I intend to use the book
extensively but I am anxious about what is acceptable.
Bodnotbod