 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I'm cutting the redirect so work can start on the article. Minglex 18:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not. Minglex 19:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
tenses
editshouldn't encyclopedia articles be past tense?Teh tennisman 21:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. 141.156.14.34 00:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Except that: "Works of fiction are generally considered to "come alive" when read. They exist in a kind of perpetual present tense, regardless of when the fictional action is supposed to take place relative to "now". Thus, generally you should write about fiction using the present tense, not the past tense." See Wikipedia:Writing better articles.
- Robina Fox (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Plot
editWhy has a major part of the article been deleted. Can someone please revert it back to a time when there is a large amount of text to do with the plot (I have checked and there was a major plot section) Samaster1991 21:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- We don't really need a bunch of side information on this article. We need to add more things about the book, apart from its plot. Suggestions: History, References, Awards... --haha169 21:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
How is there no notability?
editThis is a pretty popular book, and many people read it. It's not like Harry Potter, but I think it deserves a slot on Wikipedia.
- yes, but nothing to give evidence or proof of that - where is the verifiability. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Mister Funny
editSomebody added some POV and humorous, yet inappropriate for Wikipedia phrases. I think I removed them all, but some I may have missed. Can somebody check this out? 216.209.175.136 (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
"MySpace" section
editTo whomever added the information-less (as well as pointless) section on MySpace...why? If there is something completely unimportant and unrelated to the article, don't add it! It's really that simple. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.199.160 (talk) 00:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
"Summary"
editPlease, whoever added the book cover-style blurb of the book, you really shouldn't have.
To everyone, please DO NOT replace a legitimate summary with something that sounds like an ad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.199.160 (talk) 05:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)