Comment Moved this from my own talk page here where it is pertinent     Just had a look at the rewrite While I dont necessarily agree with everything youve done I think the categories added a sense of order and progression I think youve done a really good job     Thanks for the message  Re the decision to omit the categories they are one perspective on the works of the Personal Website of the subject and thus not really neutral point of view also in terms of format most articles about subjects who are writers list the works by titles in bibliographical format titles dates and do not categorize them according to any single critical point of view  Also I added the references to the categories and qualifications about overlap etc in the source citations  The subsequent bibliography already lists works within most of the same categories in titles of collected plays  As I had said in an earlier version that I revised later the categories are basically those of Fugards own collections and really do not represent any useful additional and verifiable information  They are simply the categories already accessible in the linked External links and source citations and they are debatable  Categorizing the works from that particular viewpoint is really not encyclopedic listing works and dates is  If one wants critical discussions one can go to the sources and ELs cited  They are all accessible to any reader  Ill copy and move this exchange to the article talkpage so that others can read it there