Score

There are several books on this list that shouldn't be here, as they are either less than 1000 pages long, or nonfiction, or even both. ("Archipelago Gulag, Pt. 1" -- neither fiction nor 1000 pages -- "The Executioner's Song" -- nonfiction -- "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" -- nonfiction -- "Swann's Way" -- less than 1000 pages -- etc.)

Laura: As for the fiction/nonfiction distinction, would you rather extend the list to nonfiction, or should nonfiction entries be removed? (Or don't you care either way?)

And what about those books that have less than 1000 pages?

Thank you so much for the feedback.

I wanted to keep it to just fiction because there are so many nonfiction books, but it's fine either way. It doesn't bother me that there are nonfiction books on the list as long as they don't take over the fiction books. The Gulag Archipelago was a mistake.

Swann's Way is the first volume of In Search of Lost Time, a contender for longest novel ever. I thought it was better to just put the first volume then leave it off. I replaced it with the boxed set now.

There's the same problem with A Dance to the Music of Time, Mission Earth, a couple of the Chinese classics, and others I put up. They're so massive that they get split up, but they are singular works with over a 1000 pages. I thought it was better to put up the first volumes then leave them off.

I always thought Executioner's Song was nonfiction too, but Wiki calls it a novel - and it won the Pulitzer for fiction, so apparently the Pulitzer committee thought it was a novel too.

Live and learn ... ;)

Were one to read the books on this list one would imagine one wouldn't say things like "a 1000 pages."

Lobstergirl wrote: "I always thought Executioner's Song was nonfiction too, but Wiki calls it a novel - and it won the Pulitzer for fiction, so apparently the Pulitzer committee thought it was a novel too."

I believe the committee had some debate about it; but finally decided it was fiction.

Nathan "N.R." wrote: "Were one to read the books on this list one would imagine one wouldn't say things like "a 1000 pages.""

Why? I don't get it; is it grammatically incorrect or something?

I've never seen negative number of votes before. Does that indicate a deleted user account? I'd vote for these books to not lose them but don't know for sure that they meet the criteria.

Cassandra wrote: "Nathan "N.R." wrote: "Were one to read the books on this list one would imagine one wouldn't say things like "a 1000 pages.""

Why? I don't get it; is it grammatically incorrect or something?"

Yes, somewhat grammatically incorrect.

It would sound better to say either: "over a thousand pages" or "over 1000 pages". (The way it is currently written -- say it out loud: "over a one-thousand pages" sounds awkward.) Saying "a 1000" is "mixing your metaphors", so to speak.

I checked my own editions before I voted for books, as I wanted to make sure my editions also had more than 1000 pages. My edition of Gone with the Wind, for instance, only has 744 pages and my edition of Bleak House has 723 pages. Also, I have an unabridged edition of Don Quixote which is still 'only' 812 pages. (The edition given in this Listopia has less than 1000 pages too, by the way, and so has the edition given of Little Dorrit.) And my edition of Gargantua and Pantagruel has 777 pages, The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling has 912 pages, Centennial has 960 pages and Careless in Red has 578 pages. Including the (long) introductions in some, of course. Needless to say almost that I didn't vote for any of those ;-)

As can be seen from the above, lists like these are always highly subjective, as the number of pages strongly depends on the edition :-)

P.S.
I very much doubt whether putting a collection on this list, like The Little House Collection (#68) or The Princess Diaries Collection (#104), meets the criteria of this list.... I mean, trilogies which were later published as one book are doubtful enough, but collections...?

Mitchell wrote: "I've never seen negative number of votes before. ...."

Neither have I. According to GR "All of the users who voted for this book have removed their votes. This book will be deleted from this list soon." But it seems that doesn't happen, as your comment is made on December 31, 2013 and the following books still have negative votes at the moment:
* Remembrance Rock (1088 pages) -3 people voted
* Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Vol. 1 (shouldn't have been on the list, as it has 690 pages) -2 people voted
* Child of the Phoenix (1086 pages) -1 people voted
* Debt of Honor (shouldn't have been on the list, as it has 990 pages) -1 people voted
* A Glastonbury Romance (1120 pages) -3 people voted
* Miss MacIntosh, My Darling (1198 pages) -3 people voted

I've removed Debt of Honor and Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Vol. 1 for not meeting the criteria of this list.

Removed The Cider House Rules for not meeting criteria of the list.

Deleted Harry Potter y la Orden del Fénix less than 900 pages