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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
I created an article that appeals to the series more broadly as opposed to solely focusing on the first book. I believe either this article should be transferred over or deleted to allow for the promotion of the series overall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Murderbot_Diaries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclone1993 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was curious about the James Nicoll review, so I had a look at his website, where he states that he accepts payments to $100 review a book. Given the wealth of material out about this novella, I'm very uncomfortable with using a reviewer who charges to review books, unless there is some reason why this particular reviewer needs to be included. Thoughts? - Bilby (talk)
JDN accepts payment directly from non-publisher, non-authors to review specific items. All such reviews are tagged as Special Requests on his review site. JDN will not accept payments from any publisher or author in exchange for a review, and JDN did not accept any payment for this review in particular. (JDN does have a Patreon page, so this review may be said to be supported in part by his subscribers there. But such payments are not directly connected with any review in particular.) --Rpresser 14:34, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also point out that he specifies that "commissioning a review" is not the same as "commissioning a positive review". DS (talk) 14:45, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This may be the case, but there are good reasons for feeling uncomfortable about teh process. There are an awful lot of reviews out there for this novella - it seems better to use a different one. How about NPR [1], Amazing Stories [2] or Kirkus [3]? These aren't self published, and seem like better choices. - Bilby (talk) 20:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, you think the reviewers for NPR, Amazing Stories and Kirkus work for free? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.126.242.239 (talk) 21:32, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, I think they don't get paid by friends of the author. It isn't that big a deal, but all else being equal, I'd prefer a non-self published review by someone without the same issues. Which isn't to say that Nicoll isn't a great reviewer, or doesn't say excellent things - I just prefer to pick reviews without the additional concerns. If this was the only review available it would be iffy but ok, however when there are so many alternatives I'd go with one of them. - Bilby (talk) 21:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"2: Authors may not buy reviews of their own books; nor may their family members, publishers or agents. This is for two reasons: Yog’s Law and also the possibility that a confused minority might expect if they pay me to read their book they are then entitled to a positive review. (...) I reserve the right to break my own rules — except for #2 because, wow, can authors buying reviews go horribly wrong fast." DS (talk) 23:26, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I read that as well. But there are good reasons why this isn't the norm, so that in almost all cases reviewers don't accept money to review specific works from members of the public. Reviewers do get paid, and it is normal to get free copies to review. But being paid to review a specific book by someone other than your publisher is very unusual, even if it isn't as bad as getting paid by the author or publisher. All else being equal, I would rather use a reviewer who isn't self published and doesn't have these concerns. - Bilby (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If it bothers you that much, I think you should go ahead and remove the quote from JDN's review and use another. I just wanted to say that I have commissioned reviews from James. He just did two of mine--One was for another Wells which was very positive, and one for an author I like (Melissa McShane) which was not positive. I've met Martha Wells in person but only to get books signed, and I'm not a friend of hers. Acquaintance and fan only! Commissioning reviews is a way for me to raise awareness of authors and books that I like. Melitak (talk) 03:34, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
