This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 24.66.94.140 (talk) at 01:55, 10 May 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:55, 10 May 2009 by 24.66.94.140 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||
This page reads like a fan site, and a pretty sophomoric and pedestrian one at that. i think that ti should be cleaned up and edited down, and some plodding biographical details removed.Actio (talk) 19:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Converted from Judaism
Wasn't Stephanie Morgan's family and the family of her husband Christian Meyer both Jewish who converted to Mormonism and that heritage connection is what drew Stephanie and Christian together in the first place?. I don't see any verifiable record of this and my knowledge of this is because I too am from Scottsdale and went to school with her siblings although none were in my circle of friends.GoyBoyToy (talk) 18:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Revelations - New Book or alternate title
I looked Stephanie Meyer up on Chapters and they say that she has a book coming out called "Revelations" on November 15, 2008. Is this the same as one of the books soon to be released at Amazon or a different book? There is no mention of "Revelations" by Stephanie Meyer at Amazon at all.
Son likes series. 23:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)24.77.37.31 (talk) 23:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm assuming you saw this, which it says is in French, so I'm assuming it's a translation of a book, but there really isn't any other info about the book. I doubt it's a new book, seeing as she's an American author, she would publish her books in English first. ~ Bella Swan 21:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Also, it's the same cover as Breaking Dawn. 203.206.45.198 (talk) 07:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
"Revelation" is the official title for the French version of "Breaking Dawn." source: http://www.twilightlexiconforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=66313&sid=605d870436aa7aeb86cbddd526a72299
Vampires
Vampires Meyer's books have opened up a whole new type of vampires. These "modern" vampires are sometimes known as Twilight Vampires. Those who drink animal blood instead of human blood, have golden eyes, while the regular ones have red eyes. They also move with such a grace it looks like they're dancing, though some of the "regular" vampires are considered "catlike" in how they move. Both have eyes that turn darker when they're "thirsty" (or angry); have pale, granite or marble-like skin, are almost painfully beautiful, have super strength and have inhuman speed; and some, like Edward, are also known to have special abilities (mind-reading, controlling people's feelings, seeing the future and so on).
Twilight vampires defy most popular beliefs about vampires. They show up in pictures, have small fangs, and can go out in the sun, but their skin shimmers like thousands of crushed diamonds so they have to stay away from humans on sunny days to avoid controversy. They also cannot turn into bats, as vampires in various other stories do. As for the wooden stakes, Meyer says, "You try shoving wood through granite."
And as for the issue between vampires and the cliche garlic? While it does not protect humans from them, no "human" food appeals to vampires, mud to a human being is like human food to a vampire(however, they can eat human food). Vampires also have purplish bruise-like shadows beneath their eyes. They have incredible senses of smell, hearing, and sight. They are extremely fast and are astonishingly strong. Nothing can kill them, but another vampire or the Quileute werewolves. To kill a vampire, one must rip them to shreds and burn the pieces.
The special powers that the vampires have are traits that are intensified from their human life. A vampire is created by being bitten but not drained entirely of blood. The venom from a vampire has the ability to change a human into a vampire. It is a long, painful process that lasts for about three days. A new vampire will have bright red eyes for around a year. Some vampires have a great attraction to the scent of a particular humans blood. The scent of the blood is extremely appealing to the vampire. In the book New Moon this appeal is used with the word "singer", as the blood of that particular persons blood "sings" to the vampire in question.
Vampires are frozen in a state of time, therefore, they cannot sleep or grow hair or grow old but remain exactly as they were at the time of their change to a vampire. If they eat human food, they'll have to (basically) throw it up later, as otherwise it causes an uncomfortable feeling in the stomach and remains in the stomach forever. Most vampires are nomads, and travel in small groups of one or two. More than that is an extreme oddity. Vampires such as the Cullens are very rare, for many vampires do not choose their type of diet (animal instead of human). Also, some vampires are trackers, which are vampires who are greatly attracted to a human and track them until they can strike. i like cheese
Removed from page. Very encyclopaedic, unreferenced, and is irrelevant to an author page. Disinclination 19:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch, I agree...that cheese part is somewhat vandalism....and I almost feel bad that they spent so much time on it...but I do agree with you. Not appropriate for this page. Bella 22:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Okay, who the HELL wrote, "I like cheese"???? IDIOT!!!
What does cheese have to do with it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.164.8.131 (talk) 19:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Put it on the twilight series page, it is a better location. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.14.87 (talk) 19:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- I don't like cheese.121.213.253.68 (talk) 05:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Temple, Arizona
I suspect this is actually Tempe, Arizona, but I do not know anything of the subject. I could find no cities named Temple in AZ, despite the obvious Mormon connections. I encourage someone with more knowledge to make the if necessary changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Autkm (talk • contribs) 06:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
theme
I am in 7th grade and doing a report on Stephenie Meyer, and I REALLY need to know her theme or affect on society!! It is really important that I get it ASAP!!!! thanks!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.125.121 (talk) 10:44, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
omg me too she is my favorite author and if anyone has any rthing i can use I'd appreciate it! thanx! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.164.8.131 (talk) 19:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Im doin a report 2 and i need help ASAP on stephanie meyers!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.201.122.60 (talk) 18:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Vandalism on talk pages now? How very strange.--Seed-kun (talk) 09:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Critical reception
This should not be deleted. Just because people love Meyer's books, doesn't mean that the critics did uniformly.167.153.5.196 (talk) 15:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I agree completely, but the Times article in particular was actually very positive. When the quote about fan fiction is written on its own, it is taken out of context and comes off negatively in a way that I don't think was meant by the author of the article. They were merely commenting on Meyer's light writing style. Andrea (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- This is why I said reception to her books was MIXED -- this means good and bad. If an article compares an author's writing to fanfiction and the author *agrees* with, it is something that should be left in. 167.153.5.196 (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Listing the honours Twilight has received and quoting some more negative reviews is already showing mixed reception. Adding more (either positive or negative) examples would be fine, but the Time comment is not what I would call "critical reception". It is not a critique of how "good" or "bad" the books are, but a random comment on Meyer's writing style. The point of that statement was to say that her writing is not dense; it was not a critical judgement of the book(s). Andrea (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not going to add it back because you're just going to delete it, but seriously, comparing a published work to fanfiction is pretty much the opposite of a compliment. 70.107.0.34 (talk) 00:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- I never said it was a compliment, but it is still taking the comment out of context. Andrea (talk) 00:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not going to add it back because you're just going to delete it, but seriously, comparing a published work to fanfiction is pretty much the opposite of a compliment. 70.107.0.34 (talk) 00:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Listing the honours Twilight has received and quoting some more negative reviews is already showing mixed reception. Adding more (either positive or negative) examples would be fine, but the Time comment is not what I would call "critical reception". It is not a critique of how "good" or "bad" the books are, but a random comment on Meyer's writing style. The point of that statement was to say that her writing is not dense; it was not a critical judgement of the book(s). Andrea (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- This is why I said reception to her books was MIXED -- this means good and bad. If an article compares an author's writing to fanfiction and the author *agrees* with, it is something that should be left in. 167.153.5.196 (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING critical on her page. Just of kiss-ass reviews. There have been several very critical reviews against Twilight and there are numerous fans sites. I think they should be noted... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.181.19 (talk) 02:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I haven't read her whore work so I'm going to make a pretense of neutrality here: the current arrangement of a half-arsed quote from Stephen King as the entire lit-crit section is unacceptable. Reviews from respectable sources should be added. Please don't claim reviews were "good," "bad" (unless they really, really were). "Mixed" should almost never be used as it's weasel wording (every piece of literature ever written got "mixed reviews"). Instead, say So-and-so's work has been praised for its whatever (quotes and sources). Then, if you disagree with that, add "but her work has been criticized as advocating tax evasion and pedophilia" (quotes and sources). And so on. Hitnruni95 (talk) 06:34, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Fan following
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/books/275668_twilight29.html "The book's selfless, tormented hero, Edward, certainly accounts for a large part of the collective swoon. Meyer, in fact, refers to her Seattle and Forks events as 'I Love Edward' parties."
This makes it sound less like Forks has hosted a festival or party entitled "I Love Edward," but rather that Meyer colloquially refers to her appearances there that way. Thus the line in the "fan following" section either needs a reference or should be rewritten or deleted. 167.153.5.196 (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Since this is unclear, I changed it to mention that Forks celebrates Stephenie Meyer Day. That's a more clear indication of how they honor her. Andrea (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Plagiarism?
A Gaia Online thread isn't exactly the most reputable source, and the mention of it feels like a very odd, very random, semi-anti-Twilight jab. If no one has any other source to verify this, I think it should be deleted. --Seed-kun (talk) 09:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, it's not a reputable source- I took it out. Andrea (talk) 09:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- I respect every author. However, hearing that, especially with the erotic novel published before Meyer's own... And, we don't know how she went through the process of writing it. She may have, she may have not. Show me valid proof, and i'll stop using my proof. Distorted Fairytales (talk) 10:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- The fact remains that what you're using as 'proof' is not truly proof, it is merely someone's unreliable and possibly uneducated opinion, and by Misplaced Pages's standards, that's not proof. ~ Bella Swan 15:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, really. Can you show me any better proof that Twilight was NOT plagiarized? All I ask is for proof.Distorted Fairytales (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- If we go about it that way, then should we consider every book plagiarised until we compare them to all the books in the world and make sure no phrases match? It makes no sense. We consider all books "innocent until proven guilty" concerning plagiarism. So, if you think Twilight has plagiarised material in it, find the proof from both, and show it, because I have no idea what book it was plagiarised from, or how. ~ Bella Swan 16:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- Read Wuthering Heights, then Breaking Dawn. That was a point brought up to me. If Bella had died (Which, in a sense, she did) it would have been like Wuthering Heights, because they would have both been single fathers. I had more points, but trying to remember them at 5 am in the morning is a horrid idea. I'll edit this when my friends and I remember the points.
- If we go about it that way, then should we consider every book plagiarised until we compare them to all the books in the world and make sure no phrases match? It makes no sense. We consider all books "innocent until proven guilty" concerning plagiarism. So, if you think Twilight has plagiarised material in it, find the proof from both, and show it, because I have no idea what book it was plagiarised from, or how. ~ Bella Swan 16:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, really. Can you show me any better proof that Twilight was NOT plagiarized? All I ask is for proof.Distorted Fairytales (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- The fact remains that what you're using as 'proof' is not truly proof, it is merely someone's unreliable and possibly uneducated opinion, and by Misplaced Pages's standards, that's not proof. ~ Bella Swan 15:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- I respect every author. However, hearing that, especially with the erotic novel published before Meyer's own... And, we don't know how she went through the process of writing it. She may have, she may have not. Show me valid proof, and i'll stop using my proof. Distorted Fairytales (talk) 10:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: I JUST THOUGHT OF ONE MORE. SHE CLEARLY POINTED THIS OUT. Firstly, I forgot to sign. My bad. Nonetheless, she clearly stated that she pulled characters from different series, and morphed them to make an Edward Cullen. Who the hell thinks they can get away with that? 12:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Distorted Fairytales (talk • contribs)
- Ideas cannot be plagerized, only words. If you can find a specific quote from Wuthering Heights or any other book, and show an almost identical, or identical quote from one of the Twilight novels that corresponds with the quote from the other book, then you can state that there was plagiarism in the article. ~ Bella Swan 16:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I would like to point out that the whole point of copyright laws is so that ideas are not stolen/copied. Just thought you might want to know that.
Fail?
Some vandalist, in the last 15 or so edits, has changed some parts of the information to the words "failure" or "fail". I just want to make people aware, as it has been ignored, and I can cannot change the information back because I haven't the right knowledge about the author to change these things myself. Thanks, n i m b u s a n i a 06:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Done with Midnight Sun
I usually troll this page, but please forgive me. That's sorta hard, but I have something to point out, which killed me a little. I lied about not having general respect for her. ANYWAYS, she will not be continuing Midnight Sun, due to her friends letting it be leaked. Something along those lines, i'm assuming. I'm not planning on changing it, due to the people going to edit it back, and the untruthfulness shown by me, but I can get the link... ] (Her official site) I don't know it gets taken off her bibliography, and I really don't want to edit it. No one may believe me. ~ Distorted Fairytales (talk) 02:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- I saw the link the other day, and part of her bio was already changed in accordance to this, I just changed the rest of it. So, problem solved. ~ Bella Swan 02:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm just afraid to change such things, because i'm afraid to be slapped with a fish. No, not really. I think i've just given up, especially after that.
Only thing I have to say is you shouldn't do that. Anyways, thanks. ~ Distorted Fairytales (talk) 02:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
On her website is the copy that got leaked.I think it is better than all of the other twilight books.
Froggi95 (talk) 20:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Froggi95
vandilism
i think that this statment: but this project is now on hold because it was stupidly released illegally by fans, so she is not wanting to write it. is vandilism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.203.72 (talk) 18:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Also, this page was vandilised by a Twilight fan. Stephenie Meyer has not sold 25million copies of her books. Infact, shortly before the release of Breaking Dawn, she had only sold 8.5million copies of her four previous books (twilight, eclipse, new moon, and the host) and the book sales, though 1.4mil on its first day of breaking dawn, are still about 10million shy from 25 million quoted last I heard, which had it at 11.5million estimated sold. Also, they clump 7 citations to that statement in attempt to make it real, when really none of the citations back it up, or even have anything to do with the book sales itself.
- Perhaps you should read the sources provided. Andrea (talk) 16:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Picture
I just read all of her books and i went to go to her wikipedia page when to m horrer i saw tht she had no picture. and when i tried to uplod one it waid i was not able to. so i am aking if any of you can uplod a picture of her would you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weirdjrc (talk • contribs) 14:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Could someone please change Stephenie's photo? It's not very flattering...Google an image please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valeria P (talk • contribs) 20:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Trouble is we need a picture with a free license. Which typically means either GFDL, CC-BY-SA (or less restrictive) or public domain. CIreland (talk) 20:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Reorganization/Crit. Rec.
I just completely reorganized the article, but I wanted to explain why I took out any "Critical reception" heading. I did this because technically this article barely has any at all, except a tad on Twilight. I don't think this is the place for including critical reception on each book, but maybe for general reviews about the whole series (as we are attempting in the Twilight (series) article) or generally on her writing style. So, while I took it out for now, I think some overall "Critical reception" should definitely be added in the future. Andrea (talk) 19:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
With an E
Is there any explanation available - or possible - for the non-standard way she spells her first name? Is it a typo, or were her parents not English speakers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.154.153 (talk) 17:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Probabyly from her dad Stephen, where she gets he name. Since her dad's name is S-T-E-P-H-E-N, her's is Stephenie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.18.38.31 (talk) 21:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, you're right. Stephenie said that on her personal site. Clem (talk) 01:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what her parents were named, or how her name is spelled. In this "modern" society of ours, it seems as if the more stupid/"exotic" sounding your name your kid, or the stranger the spelling of his/her name is, the more socially hip you are. I think its disgusting. Why torture those poor kids like that? Give them a real name, for their sakes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.74.223 (talk) 01:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
i think her name is cool because it is spelled differently. Names that are different are pretty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isleesme (talk • contribs) 04:13, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Midnight Sun Release
According to a June 2008 update on stephaniemeyers.com she is releasing Midnight Sun and decided to have it published after all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashlynnebelle (talk • contribs) 01:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- Her announcement that she was putting Midnight Sun on hold came in August 2008, after the June posting that you are referring to. Andrea (talk) 01:56, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
facts, not opinions
Resolved
so here's my problem with the page.
"She grew up in Phoenix, Arizona, with a large family"
"large" is a subjective term. wikipedia articles shouldn't use such partial language. And it's really some person's opinion, not a fact. They can qualify it by saying " a large (by american standards) family", but then they would need to cite the "(by american standards)" part.... will someone just change it please, it is quite infantile! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.53.230.217 (talk) 01:45, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, fixed. Andrea (talk) 02:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Why don't you just say how many people were in her family? Or does anyone know?
And realitively few people would be confused by the use of the word "large" in that context.
She had two sisters and three brothers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.17.85 (talk) 21:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Film Adaptation for New Moon:
Summit Entertainment has slated the release date for New Moon, the film adaptation of the second novel, for November 20. 2009 in the USA. Chris Weitz, the director of the Golden Compass, has been taken onboard to direct after conflicts with Catherine Hardwicke (director of Twilight) led her to back out of the project.
Source: http://pro.imdb.com/news/ni0629352/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.230.135 (talk) 14:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Criticism
There must be a section on criticism about her, because I'm sure there's plenty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.11.53 (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
i have a friend who really dislikes stephenie meyer. he thinks she is an amature writer.
- We're not a chat room (see WP:TALK) RJaguar3 | u | t 04:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I have added a criticism section with the most recent quote from Stephen King. He's a highly notable authority on writing and his criticism should carry weight, especially to balance out the article. Now I'm sure she's been criticized by several bloggers, but King isn't your everyday blogger so it should merit inclusion. Atlantabravz (talk) 03:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
There must be more, the Twilight books were frickin AWFUL. Surely someone notable has noticed that Bella is incredibly anti-feminist? I feel like it is notable that her female lead spends her time cooking for her father, throws aside her college plans to marry her high school boyfriend, and has no hobbies, friends or other interests outside Edward. I'm sure other people have noticed this to, but surely someone has commented on this in a manner usable within Misplaced Pages?....
- Example something like this, http://articles.mibba.com/Entertainment/1387/Anti-Feminism-Affects-Vampires-Too
Except more notable then an online blog. --Pstanton (talk) 20:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- And this A piece written by a program assistant at the National Women's Law Center:
http://www.womenstake.org/2008/08/twilight-time-f.html --Pstanton (talk) 20:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Just get somebody to alert Germaine Greer to the books. Then you'll get your quote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.153.208 (talk) 13:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Take a look through the following link; http://twilightsucks.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=twilight&action=display&thread=220&page=1 and do as you deem fit with what you find.
- Taliesin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.172.175 (talk) 11:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Stephanie Meyer`s Succes
———————16:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)TwilightFansite621jab (talk)Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref>Stephanie Meyer has had many succes moments in her whole life well first she wrote and illustrated Twilight , New Moon , Eclipse , and Breaking Dawn for her vampire - romance books , but on the other - hand she wrote The Host which is A Pro Alien source written and illustrasted by Stephanie Meyer with the help of her publisher and producer !!
Infobox
Sorry, but can someone fix her infobox, it appears to have been vandalized. --Pstanton (talk) 05:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're referring to; what's wrong with it? Andrea (talk) 05:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Section- "The Twilight Series"
I've added the "Unbalanced" tag (which, yes, I know, is an article tag, but there is no similar section-specific tag) as the section which specifically deals with the Twilight series entirely neglects mentioning of any criticism of Twilight.
the closest we come to criticism of Twilight is:
However, critical reception has been mixed. Booklist wrote, "There are some flaws here — a plot that could have been tightened, an overreliance on adjectives and adverbs to bolster dialogue — but this dark romance seeps into the soul." Kirkus wrote: " is far from perfect: Edward's portrayal as monstrous tragic hero is overly Byronic, and Bella's appeal is based on magic rather than character. Nonetheless, the portrayal of dangerous lovers hits the spot; fans of dark romance will find it hard to resist."
Instead of mentioning actual criticism, we get reviews which vacillate. I KNOW there is legitimate criticism, I know I myself thought Twilight was incredibly sexist, and promoted abusive relationships. These views aren't uncommon but they aren't voiced within the article at all.
In regard to the critical reception of Meyer's work, this article tends to feel a little white-washed. --Pstanton (talk) 05:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Full critical reception for each book (and the series as a whole) is included in those respective articles. Very little is provided in the section you tagged because it is merely meant to be an overview of the history of the series. The only reason any crit. rec. is included there at all is so it wouldn't seem unbalanced, since naming its awards and saying it sold well was important for explaining why the series was continued, but falsely made it look like everything about it was positive. The actual Critical Reception section was only begun recently, and is definitely not sufficient. However, I don't think this article should simply restate all of the reception that is already included on the respective book pages. If any is included here at all (many author pages don't have such sections), it should be specifically about her writing style. That is, general comments about her as a writer, such as those from Stephen King, and not specifics on the individual books or series. The problem here is that some comments from King are not nearly enough, but I've had trouble finding such criticism and don't want to just repeat what is already included in more appropriate places. Andrea (talk) 05:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
As a random bystander with some small knowledge of this, I suggest you take a look at the following link; http://twilightsucks.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=twilight&action=display&thread=220&page=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.172.175 (talk) 11:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Image
I was trying to find an image that could legally be used in the article that was more of a professional photo, and I was wondering if the picture of Stephenie that is in the back of her book would work. Technically the photo was published with the book, so if the photographer is cited, could it legally be used in the article? VioletShadow (talk) 21:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, but no, a image such as that would not be allowed. In articles about living people, the only images that may be used are "free" images, which don't include those that are promotional/copyrighted. You can read this for more information on the use of copyrighted material in articles. Andrea (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Main Idea of the book Twilight By: Stephenie Meyer
The Main Idea in her first book, Twilight. Is that Bella begins to fall in love with Edward Cullen. Soon before you know it he fucks her, harder than what she did for him. So where I am getting at is that when bella saw Edward for the first time she fell in love instantly but has no idea that he is not only an extremely hott guy!!! But he has the side to him in which is blood thirsty for Bella's Blood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.120.91.85 (talk) 04:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think we all realised the point of the book, like it or not. Farslayer (talk) 09:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
This is an award winning book/movie and it will be known and legenalized for years to come! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.188.58 (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC) It'll be forgotten in a few years, tops. It's not "classic" material. Hell, it's barely material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.95.247.110 (talk) 22:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
A little bit of cleanup?
OK, I've been doing a little bit clean-up of this article. I think everything seems to be completely jumbled up here. For the criticism - I'm going to add it to the MAIN Twilight article including that "Kirkus" review etc... Blytonite (talk) 09:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
No mention of Prop 8 donation
Meyer gave a lot of money to Yes on Prop 8, assuming nobody would find out, apparently. We did. Why isn't it mentioned in the article? Its relevant, especially considering the large gay following the books have. --Ragemanchoo82 (talk) 04:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Can you provide a source? Andrea (talk) 04:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikiprojects and picture
Why is Meyer in both the Novels and Children Wikiprojects? Last I checked, she wasn't a book. I think she should be removed, being in Brigham Young and Biography is more then adequate, unless there is a wikiproject specifically for authors. --Pstanton (talk) 19:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Also, can anyone make out where she is in her infobox picture? It confuses me to no end. --Pstanton (talk) 19:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)