Talk:A Severed Head

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Novels Mid‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I don't know how to edit this, but the synopsis is so wildly off the mark that one wonders if the writer even read the book. The use of "Cupid's arrow" and "macho attributes" are absurd. Can someone who has read this book please change this?

As far as moving the spoiler warning farther down, please see my comments at Talk:The Lady Vanishes. KF 17 Sept 2002

That is a crap synopsis.

agreed, at times it's more of a review or analysis than a summary, and it's not really that accurate. I added subheadings so that it might be easier to start changing the wording; some of the phrasing is peculiar eg "At roughly the same time Cupid's arrow hits Lynch-Gibbon again." Klauw 23:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The synopsis is, among other things, inaccurate and highly subjective. Martin proclaims repeatedly in the course of the book that he loves Antonia very much contrary to the synopsis' claim that his marriage was of convenience rather than love. In agreement with Klauw's notation of "Cupid's arrow" there is also the comment on the "number of macho attributes" which is unexplained and inappropriate. The synopsis reads like someone's blog review rather than something I should expect to find in Wikipedia. Tandykins (talk) 02:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]