Can I ask why? This is my first foray into the world of Wikipedia editing. I thought it was well sourced and they are legitimate themes. I can definitely see it needing some editing to scrub away all impartiality, but overall it was factual.
- I do sympathise, and I agree with some of what was in your edits. But I'm afraid it's one of the rules of Wikipedia that one shouldn't write personal essays, even if they are sourced from within the book being discussed. One states either purely factual information about the plot, sourced from within the book, or interpretations that can be sourced from secondary literature (such as book reviews and works of criticism). I know, as I've often sailed quite near the wind myself! (For example, it seems overwhelmingly obvious to me that The Silver Chair is an attack on Freudianism, but when I said something like that on Wikipedia it was quite rightly removed.)
- One is rather freer to post personal opinions about a book on Amazon. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 16:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)