I saw on Stanley's Twitter feed that Richard Malim had posted the first review on Amazon and bragging that he didn't read it. I was puzzled, because I thought Malim posted his review after mine, but then I remembered the UK Amazon site. So here's by belated review from the American site.
This is a very good, succinct, and accurate condensation of the Shakespeare authorship question, one of the longest-running fringe arguments in crank history. I was happy to see that Professor Wells takes on Richard Roe and Diana Price and that he doesn't give the arguments for the individual 'candidates' any more space than they deserve. Without becoming tedious, Professor Wells gives more than sufficient evidence for Shakespeare's authorship that anti-Stratfordians have never successfully rebutted.
The distinctive characteristic of all anti-Stratfordian claims is that they are forced to invent labyrinthine, torturous scenarios to explain the most obvious objections to their assertions, i.e. both Marlowe and Oxford were dead long before half the plays were written. Their method is to peremptorily decide that William Shakespeare couldn't have written the works based on fallacious and (repeatedly) disproved reasoning, and then filling in the blanks they've created with whatever fiction takes their fancy. Not one scrap of evidence has ever been produced pointing to an author other than William Shakespeare, but anti-Stratfordians lack the intellectual honesty to look squarely at the evidence, instead positing a giant conspiracy (or not, depending on the exigencies of the moment) that covered up all the evidence for the true author.