[WikiEN-l] Age fabrication and original research

[Surreptitiousness]

FT2 wrote:
> The issue for fiction can be summed up within with one question, almost.
> Here is a nice simple book. Obviously any /analysis/ will be from good
> quality sources. But what kind of sourcing is appropriate to its plot
> summary? Many well-read books don't have plot summaries in reliable sources,
> and yet "anyone reading the book can see what its basic plot is", and we
> have hundreds of editors to reach consensus on what it says.
>
> (Key issue: any book is a primary source on its own contents.)
>
>   
You've misread me.  The key question is, why should we summarise this 
plot. That's what's causing the problems with fiction on Wikipedia at 
the minute. Although having said that, the drama does seem to have died 
off a bit lately. Which kind of suggests a consensus of sorts exists.