| Revision as of 04:33, 7 September 2006 editMystar (talk | contribs)971 edits →Themes section: m← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:51, 7 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,346,752 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Novels}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion | ||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{oldafdfull | date = 21 February 2007| result = Speedy Keep| page = Stone of Tears}} | |||
| {{NovelsWikiProject|class=B|importance=Mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|listas=Pillars of Creation, The| | |||
| {{WikiProject Novels|importance=Mid|fantasy-task-force=yes|fantasy-importance=Mid|sword-of-truth-task-force=yes|sword-of-truth-importance=High}} | |||
| }} | |||
| ==Start== | |||
| I've started this article off but I haven't read it (the book) recently enough to be able to complete it. If no one else follows up, I will read it again and make this a little more accurate and detailed. ] 20:30, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC) | I've started this article off but I haven't read it (the book) recently enough to be able to complete it. If no one else follows up, I will read it again and make this a little more accurate and detailed. ] 20:30, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC) | ||
| Line 28: | Line 32: | ||
| Secondly Neo makes a poorly worded intro... are we to read like we are still in 9th grade? I think not, lets not write like we are.... I have as much right and ability to edit as you or anyone. | Secondly Neo makes a poorly worded intro... are we to read like we are still in 9th grade? I think not, lets not write like we are.... I have as much right and ability to edit as you or anyone. | ||
| :It's a plot introduction that I changed. Not a summary. As it is now it reads like a advertising blurb for the book, something you'd find on the inside of a dust cover. Our job is not to "entice the reader". This is an encyclopedia not a fan site but I'm tired of trying to reason with you so I'll just add the appropriate templates and wait for someone else to convince you this isn't part of the Great Anti-Goodkind Conspiracy of Evil and Spite but an effoer to imporve the article. ] 06:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I think you need to take a step back and look at what you just said... | |||
| I have done exactly what you are advocating. Just because it sounds exciting in no way makes it 'UN-encyclopedic". this is also not a "job" it is a free and open board. A place for people to add to , edit and to enjoy. What I've place is a plot summary. It is simply worded in a better gramatical fashon. | |||
| Oh, and I'll thank you not to infer someting that isn't there. I do not see any attempt by me to inply, infer or otherwise insuinate that this was any such thing. I am and did infer that this is simply a wording and gramitical fix... | |||
| ] 11:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I guess you and I are just in disagreement over the wording of the section. I'll wait for some others to weigh in. ] 11:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Tone and content== | |||
| The problems of tone and content are in this article as the other individual SoT pages. Please see the ] page for more info. ] 14:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:51, 7 February 2024
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 February 2007. The result of the discussion was Speedy Keep. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
Start
I've started this article off but I haven't read it (the book) recently enough to be able to complete it. If no one else follows up, I will read it again and make this a little more accurate and detailed. Kouros 20:30, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Themes section
The Themes section needs a rewrite but I'm really not the right person to do it. The seond sentence needs to go as it's POV, WP:OR and incorrect in tone. If I delete it that only leaves the section with a single sentence so there is really no point in keeping it at all. If no one wants to rewrite it soon-ish I'm just going to pull it but I'd like to see it stay if possible. NeoFreak 09:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
NeoFreak, have you read this book? The second sentence, 'There is also an emphasis on the ability to choose our own course in our lives - this is most evident through the parallel tales of Oba and Jennsen', I don't see as POV. The book mainly follows Oba and Jennsen (separately), and shows how when they are both given the same/similar opportunities, they make different choices. Thus, showing us the ability to make our own decisions in life. -Merrit
- Would someone please explain to Mystar why I made the changes I did, he doesn't listen to me. NeoFreak 18:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- I have to agree with NeoFreak here. His edit is:
- A) Better gramatically,
- B) More concise, and
- B) Gives away less information
- Overall, it's a better introduction, mostly because it can be readily understood by someone unfamiliar with the SoT series. - Runch 20:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Neo placed this..."The book revolves around a woman by the name Jennsen who is running from assassins sent by Lord Rahl to kill her. As it becomes clear that running will do her no good as, where ever she goes, Lord Rahl's soldiers will find her. A stranger convinces her that it is time to stop fleeing and fight back and that if she wants to live, she must kill Lord Rahl".
Fact is this is factual and accurate "For most of her life, Jennsen has been running from the assassin's sent by Lord Rahl to kill her. Any ungifted child of the Lord Rahl must die. It has become very clear that running will do her no good, wherever she goes, Lord Rahl's soldiers will find her. A seemingly heroic stranger convinces her that it is time to stop fleeing and fight back. If she wants to live, she must kill Lord Rahl.".
Neo's is poorly written ask any English major/professor/literary agent... A plot summary is designed to give the reader information as to the nature of the work, the contextual content, a name of the main character and a teaser to bind the reader into wanting to read the book. You have used poor grammatical context..."The book revolves around a woman by the name Jennsen who is running from assassins sent by Lord Rahl to kill her".
Proper usage would be what I've stated. It gives nothing away, but entices the reader. We have "how long this has been happening to whom, we have who is perpetrating the act, we have the realization of action and we have the plot device... all properly worded, all contextual and all nicely succinct....
Secondly Neo makes a poorly worded intro... are we to read like we are still in 9th grade? I think not, lets not write like we are.... I have as much right and ability to edit as you or anyone.
- It's a plot introduction that I changed. Not a summary. As it is now it reads like a advertising blurb for the book, something you'd find on the inside of a dust cover. Our job is not to "entice the reader". This is an encyclopedia not a fan site but I'm tired of trying to reason with you so I'll just add the appropriate templates and wait for someone else to convince you this isn't part of the Great Anti-Goodkind Conspiracy of Evil and Spite but an effoer to imporve the article. NeoFreak 06:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I think you need to take a step back and look at what you just said...
I have done exactly what you are advocating. Just because it sounds exciting in no way makes it 'UN-encyclopedic". this is also not a "job" it is a free and open board. A place for people to add to , edit and to enjoy. What I've place is a plot summary. It is simply worded in a better gramatical fashon.
Oh, and I'll thank you not to infer someting that isn't there. I do not see any attempt by me to inply, infer or otherwise insuinate that this was any such thing. I am and did infer that this is simply a wording and gramitical fix... Mystar 11:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- I guess you and I are just in disagreement over the wording of the section. I'll wait for some others to weigh in. NeoFreak 11:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Tone and content
The problems of tone and content are in this article as the other individual SoT pages. Please see the Talk:Stone of Tears page for more info. NeoFreak 14:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Categories: