Review of 1.2.2.1. Adult/Child Lit?

[Talisman]

Talisman stumbles through the Catalogue door,  to rousing choruses 
of "Ding, Dong the...

Hey!  I'm not dead yet!  Just MIA in RW Troll wars.  Then to, I 
thought I'd better make some progress before I showed my face.  

Finished my review of 1.2.2.1. Adult/Child Lit.; scheduled 
executions; and, fell to my knees praising God that I won't have to 
read any more "think of the kiddies" arguments, at least until the 
next duffer starts up...

I'm axing 100 of the 297 in this category.  Could have axed a few 
more if I really WAS jealous of Kneasy's percentages.  :P 

(Just wait and see what happens now you've whet his appetite for 
whacking categories en masse.  His initial urge to purge that  
Military Strategy/Tactics set was palpable.)

I like the slurry of close combat, anyway.

Back to kiddie lit: Lots of nothing new, nothing at all, mere 
agreement, and OT.  

Kept some posts that were really not all that fresh but were at 
least carefully argued, maybe entertaining (rare), or closely tied 
to arguments in other categories that were useful. (E.g. better 
about genre, but closely tied to older ideas about age 
appropriateness.)

Kept some posts that were mostly regurgitations of topic-appropriate 
articles critiquing the HP series because I think someone who 
actually wants to research this issue will find these references 
helpful.

Going forward, I would say: only code posts here if they provided a 
useful link/reference or a justified argument (for defining a target 
audience) drawing  from a persuasive source, be it canon, critical 
technique, external references, etc.  There should be something 
clearly beyond the poster's bald statement, personal 
feelings/morals, or experiences with local children.  

Even when an opinion is based on canon, let's shoot for insightful 
and interesting use of canon.  Not just "If DD betrays Hermione's 
trust the children will never do their homework again, blah, blah, 
blah."

I thought I was done with this category-combo. I hadn't noticed that 
I had the 1.2.2.2. NY Times articles, too. (Damn, can`t argue it 
doesn't belong here.) 

Did this happen in the reshuffle? Or was I just blinded by optimism? 
Ah well, I guess I'm going back in now so that I can finally put 
paid to the accursed lot.

Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.

Talisman

P.S. Carolyn: Love your Molly Weasley bit.  
I quite seriously believe she's ripe for the skewer. 

A Dark Mark over The Burrow? Garden Gnomes dancing merrily in pools 
of collecting blood, tossing Lockhart's text about for confetti?  My 
pulse quickens.

Kneasy: I am trying. I have started yet another post to you 
(currently at 6 pages, responding to your TOC quip re the pensieve 
memory-edit).  As I trudge back into the catalogue, I fear for it 
joining the heap of dusty, unfinished posts that will never serve a 
purpose--other than to cause my will to be contested for insanity 
when surviving relations sort through them.  

Anne, I see you waving at me.  I just wonder why your thumbs are in 
your ears...