"This review is more than I can digest!" said Goldilocks, as she sampled Papa Bear's detailed critique. Next she moved to Baby Bear's terse response. "And this review has no substance!" she complained. "'Needs work' doesn't feed me at all!". She walked around to Mama Bear's response. "This one is just right," she beamed happily. "Now I know just where fo focus my efforts!" How much is too much? How much is not enough? If you are the reviewer, you don't want to spend an hour and a half writing a detailed review that the author skims over but doesn't know where to begin with. And the author is likely to be discouraged by a laundry list of small details as long as his or her arm. Of course, too short a review isn't helpful either. A review needs to be specific, and if it addresses minor punctuation defects when the overall structure is the major flaw, you may as well not have bothered. The piece you are reviewing may need improvement in many areas (in your opinion! Never forget that!). But to keep a review to a digestible size, you should stick to no more than three top five points. Why three to five? Because that is a quantity of information easily grasped and held in someone's attention. More than that is like trying to carry too many eggs across th eroom in your hands; you are not ony likely to drop the excess ones, you are likely to lose the lot of them trying to hold onto that most precarious one. So because you need to focus on a small number of points, be smart about selecting them. Don't just latch onto the spelling mistakes because they are easiest to convey. Try to select the three to five biggest problems with the piece. Don't try to find every example if it's a recurring item, just point out a couple exaamples and mention that there are other instances. This way, you should be able to generate reviews that are reasonably concise, but more importantly, cut to the heart of the matter with useful recommendations.