Yes, there are mistakes in the book that should be pointed out and corrected but your claims that it's poorly researched and doesn't meet the standard of "curatorial scholarship", are exaggerated and incorrect. Show me a book or academic paper about anything that doesn't have multiple errors and I'll show you my pet unicorn Sally.

Again, there are multiple mistakes in the book and it's great that you want to find them, however, there is no need to repeatedly attack the authors because the book has mistakes and ommisions. Most reasonable and knowledgable people would agree that overall, it's a very well-researched book.