User talk:Kevinalewis/2006archiveQ3

Welcome - to my July 2006 – September 2006 talk archive

Archives
October 2005 – December 2005 January 2006 – March 2006 April 2006 – June 2006 July 2006 – September 2006 October 2006 – December 2006 January 2007 – March 2007 April 2007 – June 2007 July 2007 – September 2007 October 2007 – December 2007 January 2008 – March 2008 April 2008 – June 2008 July 2008 – September 2008 October 2008 – December 2008 January 2009 – March 2009 April 2009 – June 2009 July 2009 – September 2009 October 2009 – December 2009 January 2010 – March 2010 April 2010 – June 2010 July 2010 – September 2010 October 2010 – December 2010 January 2011 – March 2011 April 2011 – June 2011 July 2011 – September 2011 October 2011 – December 2011 January 2012 – March 2012 April 2012 – June 2012 July 2012 – September 2012 October 2012 – December 2012 January 2013 – March 2013 April 2013 – December 2013 January 2014 – December 2014 January 2015 – December 2015 January 2016 – December 2016 January 2017 – December 2017 January 2018 – December 2018
Current Talk
updated 14 April 2009 — •

Thunderball split

Hi Kevin - Yes, it should be split, but it's a featured article, so I think someone who's a Bond aficionado (or has at least read the book and seen the film) should do it. Anyone you know? ♥ Her Pegship♥ 16:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I oppose the splitting of this article. For one thing it would render its FA status null and void since it became FA as an article on both film and movie. I do not feel it (nor any of the other Ian Fleming Bond book/film articles) really need to be split. User:K1Bond007 is the lead editor on these articles (yes I know no one "owns" articles but he's done more work on the Bond books/films than anybody, including myself and I created most of them). I think he should be consulted. (Unfortunately I am going on a Wikiholiday for the next few weeks and will be unavailable to give input on this issue). 23skidoo 23:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Please hold until July 5 or 6

I hope to get the prototypes up today. That will leave a limited debug period, and with luck we can publish infomation on 3 lists. I desperatly need to know what categories should be looked at for all 3 lists. I am sorry if you gave this to me before, but I ask agian. (All three lists should be new versions, I hope you like them!) Eagle talk 17:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh and hurls Harry Potter Novels ... I was hoping to catch a break, but that is ok, I will take a break after the newsletter is published. Untill than, my time and effort goes to the autolists :) Eagle talk 17:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Years 1900 to 1961 done

Reply to User_talk:Grey_Shadow#Years_1900_to_1961_done.

I lost count above 1000Grey Shadow 10:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I was waiting on your comments.

Feel free to publish at any time. I will move what is in the incomplete list to the novels stubs. I am glad you like the format. I will continue to add more, but that will do for now. I will put the new list up today so it does what the page says. Sorry for the delay, I was waiting on your comment. Eagle talk 15:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

yes please feel free to modify my statement. (publish all the plans. I would like to have more imput) Eagle talk 15:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Novels and Movies

For articles that cover both a novel and a movie of the same title, is there a standard article title format to split them up (e.g. "Starship Trropers (novel)", "Starship Troopers (movie)")? Also, is there a standard novel infobox to be used at this time?

Second things first. Non specifically, but we use {t1|Infobox Book}}. On the naming the major work of the two would tend to get the "basic title" and the other would tend to get either "Title (novel)" or "Title (film)" or if more than one "Title (Jo Soap novel)" or "Title (1992 film)". Hope that helps. Don't forget Disambiguation pages. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 21:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

And thanks for the heads up regarding archives. Seems a much better way to clean up. x 16:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

no problem. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 21:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Criteria

Criteria is as you set it. I will move the book to novel stuff to the right place. within 26 hours of this post I will put up the new prototype list. Status of the code is go :).

Note on the criteria, for the current lists it is as stated. For the new proto list (up in 26 hours of this post) it will be very simple, are the hits correct, am I giving you guys articles that have complete infoboxes? I can guarrentee that all the articles will have an infobox... becuase I will be parsing the template category. The primary problem will be to seperate out novels from the books. (right now the code will give both) Remember this is a wiki... All I am doing is writing the code, this wikiproject needs to tell me what to do. (p.s. I want to start to have conversations on one of our forums (WP:NOVEL talk page), rather than on our talk pages. Eagle talk 02:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

To make it 100% clear, the new proto list will have ALL the incomplete infoboxes. Our problem will be sorting the novels from the books. (of course we could do both..., or make this list a joint project...) Eagle talk 02:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

ok by 04:00, 7 july 2006 (UTC) I will be ready. Feel free to edit my statement in the newsletter :) I have other things on my hand. Thanks Eagle talk 06:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Novels WikiProject Newsletter July 2006

Here is the new edition of our monthly newsletter.

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue II - July 2006
Project news The project's automatically generated worklist Novels without Infobox has been worked through giving infoboxes to most of the {{mystery-novel-stub}}s. This is about to get a regeneration probably with new genres. In addition to the raft of articles on the Simon Templar as The Saint novels added last month, then the Modesty Blaise series and now starting on Matt Helm series. All the inital work of one editor! One editor has been putting in sterling work coverting novel articles from "yyyy books" categorization over to "yyyy novels". Again notice that the {{Infobox Book}} now has a new field for "illustrator" for indicating the name of someone who has illustrated the majority of the novel (or book). Member News The project has currently 104 members, 16 joined since the last newsletter in mid June 2006.	From the Members Welcome to the second issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. Particularly as this is only the second issue; any comments and suggestions are quite welcome, and will help us improve the newsletter in the coming months. Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk), Initiating Editor
Auto list news Currently we have two lists that are up and running. Undergoing testing, the third list will contain articles that have incomplete infoboxes. The new list is at NovelsInCompleteInfobox and will be very active as both a new list and a new format are being tested out at the same time. (probably ready for use by 8th July 2006) Eagle talk
Current debates New book related notability proposals have been started and are to be seen at Wikipedia:Notability (books), please take a look at these and comment. These are NOT active yet, although at first sight they seem a good basis. Categorization of novels debate is currently ongoing. Further input would be very welcome.
Current proposals You may have seen proparations going on behind the scenes with a view to establishing a format "Assessment Department". The aim of this will be to aid our efforts in improving novel articles particularly in tune with WP:1.0 and WP:WVWP methdology. There has been a small amount of interest in a Collaboration of the Week/Fortnight/Month, but to be viable we would need support.

 :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 13:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Novels WikiProject Newsletter July 2006

Hello. I thank you for informing you. A good work indeed! --Bhadani 14:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

Thanks! I had forgotten to add my Wikiproject Novels infobox. Glad to ::officially:: be part of the community now. - Runch 14:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikinovel template implemented.

Hi, I thought I'd give at least the semblance of a try at a Wikinovel presentation of "Red Shift". I don't know about becoming a full-time member of the project though. FWIW despite my location in the USA I was born in Yorkshire. Djdaedalus 16:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

A Wizard of Earthsea

Hi, was there a reason that you changed the cat on A Wizard of Earthsea from [[Category:1968 novels|Wizard of Earthsea, A]] to [[Category:Novel series|Wizard of Earthsea, A]]? Cheers Grey Shadow 01:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Novelinfoboxneeded shortcoming

How about a reference to the infobox template in this one? One must not assume your background knowledge or wikiproject experience. Just embed some usage notes in noinclude block for the next unfortunatge sod to come along with too little time, or a link or two in this template.

I disarmed the templates you left behind in talk:1634: The Ram Rebellion, since it's an anthology. If the infobox works, I wouldn't mind using it. About half this series is anthology, so advise me on what you've got and where to find it since you are deep into the novels project. Best regards // FrankB 05:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I've probably been at it too long. (Strike 'Probably'!) re: Thanks for the extra documentation be the way.... Huh!??? In any event, I'll assume you like the idea of embedded usage. Two examples simple to more complex: {{main}} and {{commonscat4}}. I'm going to bed! // FrankB 07:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I lied. Had to get in one more edit. I saw the link after posting, but it's confusing in-and-of-itself as what it links says it's the model for a template. My point is if you're going to post a 'Hey this is missing' template, why not have that warning thing, at least say what to use in usage notes, if not overtly. I'm personally big on saving people extra-clicks, so I'd just '{tl|mytemplate}' with the apropo 'mytemplate' into the 'bitching' template so that it's self-documenting the fix, as it were. G'night for real! // FrankB 08:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah fine -- assuming there is no template instead (Don't know what I read to hallucinate THAT!). If you always transclude the source, that works too. Now even newbies can figure out what to do. G'night3! // FrankB 08:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

One caution: I'm told that some templates malfunction if the noinclude is not on the same line as the end of the code of the template. I think I'd make sure of that detail, if you haven't. I was looking at the diff, so it seemed to be on a seperate line. Best! // FrankB 08:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Incomplete

Is in the works right now the list will be up by 20:00 (UTC) The criteria are Name, Author, Publisher, Release, Genre, Country, Language, and ISBN. (these are what you recommended.)

The format of the list will be:

1. Article Name StubData(Number of Words) <following this would be what ever criteria has been failed, if it is one, one is listed, if it is all 8, all 8 are listed)

A sample:

1. The Time Machine;isNotStub(3472), Publisher?, Genre?, Country?, Language?, ISBN?

Tell me what you think. Also, did not think of it, but please tell me what year ISBN started to be used on books. (I can set up a if than statement checking for this... so that old books won't show up saying it needs an ISBN. :) Eagle talk 06:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Note: I clicked on The Time Machine and noticed that this is an example of flagging an old novel as needing an ISBN (ISBN was not around)). Thanks if you can give me the first year for ISBN. Eagle talk 06:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

United Kingdom in 1966 by the booksellers and stationers W H Smith and originally called Standard Book Numbering or SBN (still used in 1974). It was adopted as international standard ISO 2108 in 1970. This is from the ISBN article. Should I use 1966 or 1970? Eagle talk 06:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and these are filtered for novels. I would be surprised if we get any non-novels (excepting human error, putting it in the wrong cat). Do you think WP:BOOKS would like a list of their incomplete infoboxes? It is easy to do, all I have to do is swap the the novel filter to all articles that Don't qualify, and volia! you have all non-novels. :) Eagle talk 06:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, this list is going to be over 1,000 articles long!!!Eagle talk 06:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/NovelsInCompleteInfobox

The list is up, Please read the infomation, and have fun! There are over 1150 articles on this list. Tell me what you think!! Eagle talk 07:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Gone for a week...

I will be gone starting on this sunday at 7:00 (UTC) and will be back the following sunday. I will have NO access to the internet. (just giving you a heads up!) Eagle talk 07:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Please look at the header on the list now!

If there is any wording changes you need to make, feel free to do so!! also, can you comment on the layout of the list? Also, should I do you think WP:BOOKS would want a list generated for them ? Eagle talk 07:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Actually it is volenteer work, but will be fun any! I left a message with the guy for WP:BOOKS, hopefully he will respond by saterday. :) Eagle talk 07:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi via Pegship's, etc.

User_talk:Pegship#Book_.27Tools.27_and_such_topics! // FrankB 18:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Please don't cross out things :)

On the incomplete infobox talk page you mentioned cross out things you have a problem with... please please don't cross out anything!!! I can't automatically reorganize these items if some are striked out!!! unless you want to manually re-organize... :) I made a statement to that effect after your comment...

Also, feel free to tinker with the instructions of the page. (and add it to the project Template:WPNOVELS oops, you already did!) On the instructions... I put a basic outline that should be modified, (I will go in an mention that things should be deleted rather than striked out. :) Eagle talk 23:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and the volenteer work is donmestic... sorry about the delay :) Eagle talk 23:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

In regards to your changes to the instructions...

particurally this one... I decieded to keep put all articles missing a ISBN field (as opposed to filerting out only articles after 1968).

Two more things:

1. I fixed the "namespace" bug (see note in false hits section)
2. any more important sections to put on this list... (Image? media_type? ect.) To add these will take one extra line of code each :) Eagle talk 00:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

More lists

I am going ahead and filling up all the lists as much as possible. Give all three a check. (I may not get around to Book->Novel) Eagle talk 07:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Gentlemen & Players

Hi, I was just wondering why you rearrange bits of information within an article on a piece of literature, like in the novel mentioned above. As far as I can see, you have not added anything. In particular, it's the list of characters after the plot outline which I find pointless, especially as this is a suspense novel and characters turn out to be different people altogether in the course of the novel. Others (major ones) I have not mentioned at all so as not to give away the whole plot / the final twist.

What is the idea behind this? Why so much uniformity, which, as I see it, in no way reflects the diversity of literature? I strongly doubt that it is for the user's benefit.

All the best, <KF> 15:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Galahad at Blandings changes

Hi, I'm a little confused as to why you've fiddled with this page - moving the character list to after the plot not only seems odd (ever read a play with the dramatis personae list at the end?) and pointless, it also upsets the uniformity of the rest of the Wodehouse articles that've been (and will continue to be, my time allowing) done in a similar style.

Also, the information you added to the infobox is confusing - while most of what's in there relates to the original first publication (publisher, dates etc), your new "hardback and paperback" presumably refers to all later republications. Why not add pdf (sure some chancer's flogging one) and audiobook for good measure?

Don't mean to sound shouty, sure you're doing a great job and all :), JohnnyZen 10:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

- I see someone else has similar issues :) JohnnyZen 10:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

- I obviously wasn't implying this was a play, it is of course an article about a novel; I mentioned plays as an example of the standard, generally accepted way of providing a list of characters in use. Is there some reasoning behind putting it afterward in the official structure? JohnnyZen 10:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

re:WPP:Novels

xpost

Seen you have added this - when there are two already WP:NOVEL, WP:NOVELS what is the rationale for another. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Not categorized, so unknown to this writer at the time of creation. Complex, huh! I'm not good at quickly assimulating new terms... a short term memory thing common to ADHD. The ones I wrote are case reflective of their proper names... so easier (for me at least) to remember. Nothing more. In further defense, no one had used {{shortcut}} on any of the pages I tagged, so the visibility was poor, so to speak.

One thought I had logging in a while back was whether there was a book templates catalog page... Something along the lines of the usage I wrote in {{commonscat4}} where each template is displayed and discussed for ease of reference. Strikes me as a good idea. (I'm big on 'self-documentation' and ease of use things... we all have limited time volunteering our services, and anything which speeds assimulation or spreads know-how to newcomers is good and Right Things to do, IMHO.) From a project management perspective, such should attract more people to become regulars in the overall project as they'd quickly gain a comfort level with the sub-community and it's tools and practices.

I'd submit that either WPP:Novels/tags and/or WPP:Books/standards name-types be considered. The page itself would be the full expanded form, not these 'shortcut' formats. (On further mature reflection, reserving 'standards' sub-article page might be better employed for some sort of checklist guideline.) // FrankB 16:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi guys - I recently rooted through the templates category and assembled a bunch of useful templates in the Category:Book templates. If you think a sub-page for either the Novels or Books WikiProject would be useful, I'd be happy to create an annotated list. Cheers, ♥ Her Pegship♥ 18:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply to your latest at User_talk:Fabartus#Kevin_joins_in! // FrankB 08:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Number of edits

Hi, I saw that you greeted me to Wikiproject Novels, and so I glanced at your userpage. It says that you have over 10,000 edits. How did you count them? Do you know how I could count how many edits I've done? I'm a little curious... LittleDan^talk 03:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I was wondering if one is supposed to show the year of publication of a book both in the infobox and in the lead sentence, or only in the infobox. What do you think? LittleDan^talk 03:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Michael de Larrabeiti/The Borrible Trilogy

Cheers Kevin, I've added all the Larrabeiti works that have been categorized to the appropriate lists. If I wanted to add further novels, should I just go ahead and do it? I realise I should just Be Bold but I wasn't sure if there was a different protocol that applied to WikiProjects. -Jim 08:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC) (crossposted from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels/Worklist).

Will keep additions to a minimum, as per your advice. Have added covers to Foxes' Oven, A Rose Beyond the Thames and The Borribles Go For Broke as promised; also brought Journal of a Sad Hermaphrodite into the WikiProject; and added all texts in the project to worklist etc.

Categorisation

Hi Kevin. I was a bit miffed you put The Wasp Factory and Walking on Glass down as stub quality. I've put a lot of work into both, and while they are far from perfect, I don't agree they fit the description:

"The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible."

You also marked the edit as minor when it is clearly more than minor. What's going on? --Guinnog 10:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply and apologies for the miffed tone. I appreciate the work you are doing. Is there anything I can do to help you? I have AWB. --Guinnog 11:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Novels categorisation

Hi, and thanks for your answer. I'm on the brink of departing to sunnier parts, so I may not have a chance now to fully respond to what you are saying. We'll surely have time enough to discuss this matter at some later point.

Just as far as the quality rating is concerned — this is the official description of "Start-class", according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Assessment:

Not useless. Some readers will find what they are looking for, but most will not. Most articles in this category have the look of an article "under construction" and a reader genuinely interested in the topic is likely to seek additional information elsewhere.

Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article usually isn't even good enough for a cleanup tag: it still needs to be built.

In the light of Last Seen Wearing ..., I simply do not understand

Ok, on that basis - neither do I -

First is that this is not specifically a "Novels" criteria as you might see it is a [WP:1.0]] grading schema inclusion.

Second I have been working almost exclusively off the "criteria" column which I think is far more rational anyway.

Thirdly, I think I must challenge (i.e. with the [[WP:1.0] people) at least some of that language of those other columns, far too combative in my view. It obviously got to you, and also when I think about it to me as well. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

1. what most readers will be looking for ("Some readers will find what they are looking for, but most will not");
2. what exactly makes the article appear to be "under construction";
3. why "a reader genuinely interested in the topic is likely to seek additional information elsewhere" (where, for Christ's sake?);
4. where, if "most material for a complete article needs to be added", all that material is supposed to come from; and, finally,
5. why "this article [...] isn't even good enough for a cleanup tag".

I'm neither trying to defend a crime novel few people outside a circle of aficionados admittedly know exists at all, nor my own work. I'd be happy if some wonderkid rewrote the text so that it could pass as "GA" or (why not?) "FA". But again: What exactly would they have to do?

Next thing to say is don't confuse issues of article quality - with subject significance. I terms of what to do to improve the article I did throw up and idea or two last post. At least for the moment and based on your observations I think a B quality grading must be the thing. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to add this to Talk:Last Seen Wearing ... (Hillary Waugh novel)/Comments as well. All the best, <KF> 11:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

9tail Fox categorisation

I'm (tentatively) querying your categorisation of the 9tail Fox article as stub-class - please see the article talk page. Thanks - Tyrhinis 18:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The Face on the Cutting-Room Floor

Please stop assessing articles. Your ratings do not make any sense at all. <KF> 22:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Pattern Templates

Hi, you asked about Novel article. When you say cleared things up "a little". does that mean you have more questions? :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I did not mean to belittle the assistance: perhaps a poor choice of words, given tone of voice is absent in the written word. Those articles – especially Ice (novel) – have made clear the aspects I was unsure about. Well, it would have been nice if the character template were used on a more notable character, such as Gandalf, so I could see how it would be used in a larger context, but if it does not exist, it does not exist. Elric of Grans 23:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Phoenix

Thanks, I'm just glad someone who had a cover found the article. ReverendG 21:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:FrankHerbert Dune 1st.jpg

I've just uploaded a replacement cover of the 1st editon of Dune. It doesn't have the black line, but the condition of the cover doesn't seem to be quite as good as yours. Which do you think is better? Grey Shadow 06:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Yours is better clearly - I would place it in the infobox and move the more recent one. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Done.Grey Shadow 16:01, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

New isStub functionality

Can you have a look at my Sandbox and tell me if the criteria for the "isStub" / "isNotStub" is set to a optimal location. The criteria are:

1. To be marked "isStub" in bold, it must have less than 450 words (minus the number of words in a template i.e. words in a {{Infobox Book}} are not counted) and the article is not currently in a stub category.
2. To be marked "isNotStub" in bold, it must have more than 450 words (minus the number of words in a template i.e. words in a {{Infobox Book}} are not counted) and the article is currently in a stub category.
3. To be marked "isStub" in normal text, it must have less than 450 words (minus the number of words in a template i.e. words in a {{Infobox Book}} are not counted) and the article is currently in a stub category.
4. To be marked "isNotStub" in normal text, it must have more than 450 words (minus the number of words in a template i.e. words in a {{Infobox Book}} are not counted) and the article is not currently in a stub category.

Let me know if any of the "word count" criteria should be changed up or down. Thanks! Eagle talk 17:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. New lists from this point on will be sorted alphabetically! (I have been working!)

Oh, and I am back :) Eagle talk 17:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

To be clear

I can adjust the wordcount for each criteria individually (really in pairs of 2 as they are in opposing pairs). Would you please make sure that this is noted somewhere, or tell me where to note this. Right now it is set to a uniform 450, but we may want to make some changes to reduce or increase the number of alerts the program gives.

Also on another note, I am right now almost done with a new alert tag. This one will alert users of all lists to weather or not the novel is in Category:YYYY novels or not. Advice on potential pitfalls is welcome :)

I have not decided yet on how to post articles that the only thing missing is this category. Advice here is also appreciated. Thanks :) Eagle talk 18:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

So true

Yes I agree it is hard to design with no imput :) So I am thanking you right now for giving me my needed imput. Thanks! Eagle talk 18:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Do check my sandbox, I have an example of the new feature! Do note, I know it is very buggy (fixing that after this post) You can tell it is buggy becuase it is telling me that an article in Category:2000 novels needs a YYYY novel category, that tells me something is wrong

Also, what does "watershed" mean? I take it as a british term that I don't know :) Eagle talk 18:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Found the bug! [[Category:2000 novels|Coram Boy]] [[Category:2000 novels]]... the I forgot about the possibility of "|Different wording" Eagle talk 18:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Permission to create new list!

I want to create a new list that will work on identifying all articles missing Category:YYYY novels. This is a list that will be run alongside all other autolists, (i.e. looking in the "whatlinkshere" for novels with an incomplete infobox will also run a second operation, all articles with the word novels in it will be checked for Category:YYYY novels and added to this second list. Thus even if the article has a complete infobox, it will still be added to this second list if it does not have Catgory:YYYY novels. Eagle talk 22:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

EDIT note that the prototype is in my Sandbox. Eagle talk 00:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, in the future... do you mind if I just create the list and tell you about it after the fact. This would make things easier on my part as most lists I create are on request of another WP:NOVELS user. (this one is!)Eagle talk 22:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Plus: do you mind if I move the book stubs->novel stubs list to a more inclusive name. (help on this is appreciated as I have no clue as to the proper name!) Eagle talk 22:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I see you got that done, no problem. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 17:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/autolist/Missing YYYY category

The title is a link to a prototype list. This list should have no false hits, and will be updated everytime I update any other list! I request that you put this list in the WP:NOVEL infobox. I fully intend on this list to be useful. Eagle talk 17:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Had a quick look I will look more closely tomorrow. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 17:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Something weird with the novel template

If you take a look at Talk:On Her Majesty's Secret Service, there appears to be a redlinked category at the bottom called "Category:No-class novel articles". It appears to have been generated by the novel template but I can't figure out where it's coming from as the template page itself gives no clue. The fact it's redlinked means the category itself has been deleted, or possibly never existed, and the term "No-class" is unlikely to be a term the Novels Wikiproject would use. I wonder if this isn't possibly a bit of sneaky vandalism somewhere down the line? I also found it on Talk:Meet the Tiger so I think it might be a template problem. 23skidoo 01:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Extremely well spotted - you know what it is you are trying to clean up a few things and along the way you make something else a mess. Anyway should be sorted now. Let me know if you see anything else. Thanks :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks good now! 23skidoo 23:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Graphic Novels

Re: User talk:Eagle 101#Follow on from Cat:year novels and User talk:Grey Shadow#is that a bug?

A question for you. Would you place something like 24: One Shot, a Graphic Novel, in {cat:Year novels} or leave it as it is in {cat:year books}? Grey Shadow 08:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Based on our project brief I would exclude them - they are considerably different animals than any textual novel, something half way between a comic and a novel. We deal in Novels and Novella (or Novelettes). Other raise short stories and being out of scope. In my veiw that is a hard one to see the borders of. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Boogiepop assessment

Thanks for assessing those articles for me. I wanted to get a bit of a benchmark for myself so that I could better understand how people would assess things: I had underestimated things, so I am glad I made that request rather than just assuming things. I should be able to use this as a basis to improve things, and hopefully make larger contributions in future. Elric of Grans 11:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Split

Just to let you know the image in this template has now gone AWOL. Another user seems to have killed the image itself! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention! The image was deleted at the Commons (due to an apparent misunderstanding), and it's been restored. —David Levy 17:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Larrabeiti articles on WikiProject

Hi Kevin: I saw you moved all the Larrabeiti articles to the correct dates. Apologies for making this extra work for you; I didn't realise when I added the articles that the date referred to when the article was started, and not when it joined the project. I now know! Jim (Talk) 22:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Not much action yet, but I've just finished merging all the articles on the Borrible books into The Borrible Trilogy, and it looks pretty good: hopefully it'll start getting some interest soon. Jim (Talk) 14:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Adrian Snell

Yes, Adrian Snell is a composer. However, Category:Composers is supposed to be a parent category while the composers are supposed to be placed in its subcategories. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Composers for these guidelines. I'm in the process of removing composers from the large category and into subcategories, and you are welcome to help. Thank you! Dafoeberezin3494 14:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

2001 cover

You said: "change back to first edition cover - leave or improve 1st quality"

Ok. What's the problem? the aniversery cover is a clear and straight good quality image -- not to mention better artwork. The quality of the other cover pic just isn't the same level. The picture of Dellea on the cover isn't as awe inspiring -- it never was. I don't want to start and edit war, so I decided to talk here first. Why did you replace the image in the box? The 2 book covers are redundant. - Jason Palpatine 16:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

House Made of Dawn

Hi, You commented that you thought the House Made of Dawn article was over-long: could I ask you to please review the changes I have made and give your opinion on the talk page, along with any extant criticisms if necessary? Cheers Vizjim 09:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

• I meant your edit comment "09:46, 8 June 2006 Kevinalewis (Talk | contribs) (This article is enormous - needs considerable cleanup.)". But don't worry and thanks for your time. Cheers Vizjim 09:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• And thanks for the "backup". It's appreciated. Zetawoof^(ζ) 07:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Giver and Thunderball

thanks for the notices about the FARs - please be aware that to get peoples attention our wikiproject uses Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/GeneralForum for its discussions. Thanks :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks so much for letting me know. I've been putting out notices about the FARs for quite a while now, and yours is the first feedback. Sandy 12:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:BernardCornwell promo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BernardCornwell promo.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 160.218.156.85 22:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Auto worklists

Ok, I updated my part. I will run the lists that need updating later today or tommarow. We need to get more effort on Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/NovelsInCompleteInfobox. This is by far our largest and most complete list. Please have the project take advantage of the work that went into making that.

Note Kenvinalewis... if you want to try WikiVoter out drop me an e-mail... to steal a line from pegship... Cheers! —— Eagle (ask me for help) 15:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Importance and Status Ratings

Hey, I just joined Wiki-projects novels and am a littl confused about one thing. Who do you (or can you) edit the importance and status ratings of an article? I've been working on The Violent Bear It Away's article, and it wasn't rated. Is it something anyone can do themselves, or do you need to apply to it or something? Thanks for your help.

Caesar 00:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, I think I figured it out.

Caesar 00:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Novels WikiProject Newsletter August 2006

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue III - August 2006
Project news In the northern hemisphere this is traditionally the season for holiday's - if you are due for one - enjoy the rest. Quiet work is going on trying to improve the coverage of Infoboxes in Novel articles and adding vital information to those Infoboxes. Those that make the most contribution do get noticed! We now have a Collaboration of the Month (see below). Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) should be looked at. It was adopted recently, but discussion is still going. Member News The project has currently 114 members, 10 joined since the last newsletter in early July 2006.	From the Members Welcome to the third issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. We would encourage all member to get more envolved and if you are wondering what with, please ask. Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk), Initiating Editor
Auto list news Currently we have four lists. The newest one is Missing YYYY category. Our largest is Novels with incomplete infoboxes. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 15:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC) to get updates to any of these lists.
Collaboration of the Month Announcing our new Collaboration of the Month which for the month of August is The Mystery of the Yellow Room. This is our first and has already been worked on seeing substantial change (and hopefully improvement). Please get involved and submit other novel titles for future collaborations. If this is successful we can really improve these articles and we may increase the frequency of the title change.
Current debates New book related notability proposals are to be seen at Wikipedia:Notability (books), if you have not seen these do take a look. The debate and level of change has slowed so thi may mean that a concensus is near! Discussion about adding two new fields, Film adaptation and Based on film, to the {{Infobox_Book}} template is going on in the WP:BOOKS talk page.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

 :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 10:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

No heading

Just a note to say you forgot to put a heading when leaving the newsletter on my talk page. Lcarsdata (Talk) 11:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

WP: Novels

Thanks for the message.. Somehow, I could not be active in the this project, but would like to do something soon. Regards. --Bhadani 13:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The books you are currently reading sound interesting. Go for it!Lady Nimue of the Lake 10:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing up the footnotes in The Violent Bear It Away article. I couldn't figure out how to do it. anon entry by User:Roxysmashsir43

WP:BOOKS and WP:NOVELS joint list?

Is it possible that we could get both of these projects (even all projects that use {{infobox book}}) to work on this list as a joint effort. This would save a lot of parsing and potential misses do to not having a particular word or two. Also, with a joint effort we can improve this infobox across all projects. (please note that I can also make a joint, list of missing images in infoboxes... This would be really easy to do if I did not have to parse for "novel" types or "book" types. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 22:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

nicolae// left behind series

I read the left behind series and I think I know alot about the series but there is one thing I must have missed. Nicolae's number (of the beast) is not 666 it is 216. I think I remember Chang saying something about him knowing why but I cant remember him or anyone else saying why it was 216. I am new to this site so I don't know how questions and answers work but if someone could tell me if they know about the number my email is: scruffy600@yahoo.com. thanks so much.

--Scruffy600 04:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Existing lists.... Is working on it

I am working on it. :) I have the multi-project list. (not up yet) —— Eagle (ask me for help) 08:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Newsletter delivery by Bot

Hello,

Sure thing, I can also take care of that delivery. I'm sorry I was on vacation last week (just came back to a hotel with a 56K and logged in to Wiki obviously :). I don't think there will be any obvious problems :)

I'll get back to you tomorrow when I'll be back home :)

Best, Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 14:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Update: I looked at the way the newsletter is constructed and delivered, and there will be absolutely no problem to deliver it. Feel free to ping me a few days before the next delivery :) -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 21:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have the list of members and the syntaxis of delivery, so just let me know when the letter is ready and I'll launch the delivery. :) -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 14:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course I am, WP:MILHIST uses the same system :) -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 15:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiNovels addition and Question

Thanks for updating my talk page. I hadn't realized that there was a template for that.

Who rates the novels?

don;t forget to sign you posts. We all do - but it is the articles we are assessing not the novel itself. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 22:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Some questions.

How long should a story be before it is considered a novel? Heart of a Dog features 9 chapters and an epilogue, I don't know the approximate number of pages. Same goes for The Fatal Eggs. The Queen of Spades by Pushkin is only 30 pages, but its density is so enormously high, many consider it to be a novel. So hence my question, what is the limit for a large short story or small novel to be included in the project? Are there any objective criteria?

Furthermore, I do think your assessment of Low-importance for Heart of a Dog is too low. I think it should qualify as Mid, as the science fiction genre in the 1920's was not very developed other than Jules Verne, and certainly not in Russia. Besides, Bulgakov is too important a writer to have anything from him labeled as Low-importance; he is the most important dissident writer in the Stalinist era. You really should read these stories/novels, they are very good, you won't be disappointed. Errabee 10:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, your answer didn't help a lot :-) But never mind, I've checked a bit. The Fatal Eggs is about 110 pages, Heart of a Dog is about 140 pages. I wouldn't call those a short story anymore. Usually, they are packaged together because they share the same theme. Errabee 12:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Novels

I'll do my best to keep an eye on the WP:NOVELS pages. Have a great break! If I have any problems, I'm sure others will be able to help answer any questions. Grey Shadow 11:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks & good to have you back. I'm looking forward to your input on the various questions I've peppered the novel project pages with. :) --Ibis3 12:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Good to have you back! Grey Shadow 12:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use still needs a source

How else can we really verify that it's a promotional photo or what-not if there's no source? (I'm referring to the Alex Rider images that you restored. Oh, well. Look at the Fair use policy:

The image or media description page must contain...Proper attribution of the source of the material, and attribution of the copyright holder (if it is different) where possible.

I'll send them to IFD for discussion and decision, though. Hbdragon88 07:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Kev : about the Charismatic Wiki Project

(I wrote to you because your Wiki page actually has a link to my fave prog/celtic band Iona - I do a radio show in the US, and I have to label it "Iona UK" because of a celtic-influenced folk band Iona (labeled "US") that has twenty years of material.)

I have a site, Spirithome.com, which is rather heavily used, and has a lot of in-depth articles on various subjects. These are all POV, and thus not directly translatable to Wiki. However, there is an awful lot of information in them that may help developers of the Wiki pages. Do you see a way I can be of help to the Project? Also, there are good "external links" on my site's links pages, that also may be a help.

(For the record : I'm a US Lutheran (ELCA, which is the part that's closest to the old 'mainline Protestants'.)

Rlongman 03:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC) spirithomeatspirithome.com

how detailed should story summaries be?

Hi there, I know that I'm listed as a participant of the Novels WikiProject, but also that I haven't yet done any major work towards building the project. I'd like to rectify that, but I need some advice.

I'm done reading Norwegian Wood (novel) by Haruki Murakami, and I've written chapter summaries for my own reference. I get the impression that a chapter-by-chapter breakdown would be rather too detailed for Wikipedia. Are there any novel articles that you would recommend in particular so that I might have some sort of model to emulate? Thanks. --Tachikoma 14:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

have a look at Mauritius Command as a example article. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 14:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer. --Tachikoma 16:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Thunderball from Featured Article status

I would like to state on the record that the removal of Thunderball from Featured Article status would not have occurred if the Wikipedia community had not insisted upon the article being split up. 23skidoo 13:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

By the way, where was the review? The two links on the Former FA banner are redlinks. Was there no discussion???? 23skidoo 13:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, but where was the discussion then? I would like to find out how one appeals this sort of thing. And if nothing else I want to make my "on the record" protest known to those who basically have now implied that the current article is crap. 23skidoo 13:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed (and apologies if it seemed like I was shooting the messenger -- I know you were just updating the banner). I mean, why was the article nominated for FA in the first place given what these people see as faults existed when FA was granted? I bet you'll find that a completely different group of users voted on the review than voted on the original FA. This is one of the big problems I'm having with Wikipedia - absolutely zero consistency in the applying of rules, whether it's regarding the use of images (I've been told, for example, that we can't use book covers and then I'm told we can), or things like AFD (an article I was following that was deleted was recreated and a different group of editors voted to keep the thing). Anyway, I have vented my spleen by adding a protest to the FA discussion, but I was serious when I added to the protest that I'm seriously considering resigning as an administrator and dropping Wikipedia altogether. It's just too frustrating and I have enough problems. (As it is - no names - we're probably going to lose another frequent contributor over this.) Mind you, for the last six months I've been getting a vibe from this place that certain people really don't want pop culture on Wikipedia at all. No worries about Finnegans Wake but heaven help you if you create an article like The Saint in Europe. Cheers. 23skidoo 14:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. And it's not really a case of my opinions being at odds with Wikipedia -- heaven knows there are people with more radical opinions than I and I also know I'm not alone is some of my attiudes. And it's not even this FA thing (file it under straw on the camel's back). I just feel that there are people who are damaging Wikipedia because they're making decisions that really make no sense. I'm talking about some of the images decisions. I've talked to a lawyer friend of mine about them and he's called B.S. on a few of the policies here. And when it comes to citing articles, I think sometimes the demands are too unreasonable -- for example in the days before the Novels Wikiproject I was actually forced to remove virtually all the content from Exterminator! because I could not provide citations for the information -- even though the article was about a primary source. I later said "nuts" to that and restored the text as it was and this time Wikipedia's inconsistency worked in my favor as no one has said a word. (And the article contains no POV or speculation, just factual information about the contents and the like.) Maybe it is time for a wikibreak, but I can see why some people have stepped away from Wiki permanently and sometimes I wonder if the community as a whole realises (or cares) that it's driving some people away. 23skidoo 17:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

hello

hello i am a boy of 20 and i have thsame ideal that u had when u wrote the book but i do not know how to write my own

ISBN/EAN

Thanks for the note. Yes it is an EAN now but from 1 January it will be an ISBN as well, wheras the ten digit version will arguably cease to be one. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 13:25 4 September 2006 (GMT).

List of World Rally Championship records

Thanks, and feel free to add something if you feel like it. I was originally going to include constructors' titles and wins too, but I got a bit lazy. Although, I might add those later if someone else doesn't beat me to it. Prolog 16:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

And Quiet Flows the Don

I've never even heard of it before today. I was able to pull some of the details from [1] and [2], but I wasn't sure if it was first published in English or Russian so I left the language blank.

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IV (September 2006)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue IV - September 2006
Project news Personally just back from annual leave - looking forward to a productive autumn here at the Novels WikiProject. Check out the project departments "Collaboration of the Month" (see below), Assessment and Outreach. Member News The project has currently 126 members, 13 joined & 1 leaver since the last newsletter at the start of August 2006.	From the Members Welcome to the fourth issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. We would encourage all members to get more envolved and if you are wondering what with, please ask. Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk), Initiating Editor
Auto list news Currently Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/NovelsInCompleteInfobox is the largest of the 4 automatically generated worklists - it is crying out for more people to assist in clearing the backlog.
Collaboration of the Month The first Collaboration of the Month went quite well if a bit slow. The second collaboration for the month of September is And Quiet Flows the Don. Do get involved and submit other novel titles for future collaborations or support those already proposed.
Current debates Wikipedia:Notability (books) is still being debated, if you have not seen these do take a look.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 12:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Newsletter delivery

The first newsletter delivery is complete! :) -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 12:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It is not a bug. If you check the history of outreach page, he added himself to full list at 14:42 just today. I got the list like half and hour before that and loaded it, and since it's not updated in the process... So it's just because he added himself there when the bot was already delivering :) -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 14:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

And Quiet Flows the Don

It's me Afghan Historian. I would love to help with this article on And Quiet Flows the Don. I read the book and I loved it ever since. I know quite a good deal about it, so I should be of some help. Please ask me whatever questions you need. I insist. Thanks! Afghan Historian 17:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Will do, as soon as I finish work on the Pashtun peoples article. It will be tonight. Afghan Historian 17:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Busy but I am willing to help

I have not helped at WP:NOVELS... is there anything that needs done? Feel free to nag me. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 22:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure... you want me to do a re-run on the infobox incomplete categery? —— Eagle (ask me for help) 12:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Wha! edit articles! yah, I could do that too. But my specialty lies in programing things. If you are interested check out WDM, my latest work. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 12:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

And Quiet Flows the Don

Thanks for the heads up! Unfortunately, I haven't read the book, which makes things more difficult. And I have a pet project of my own, requiring massive amounts of time on research: Erast Fandorin and all related novels. But I'll be sure to look into it. :) Errabee 10:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Servant of the Bones

Thanks for the feedback, Kevin! I should have mentioned that I intended to flesh out the characters and themes a bit, sorry! I'll see what I can find on Literary Significance. I appreciate the help and the welcome into WikiProject Novels. :) Estreya 14:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Priority

I would like to hear your opinion on the process of determining the importance (or priority) rating for a novel. IN the current process, it seems everyone is just following WP:BOLD, without any consensus being reached. I tried to set up a page to reach consensus, but to no avail.

Here are my views: We currently have 4 rating categories: Top, High, Mid and Low. Ideally, the distribution of novels in these categories should be something like: Top 1%, Top 10%, Top 50%, rest. When a project like ours is just starting, you'd expect the Top and High categories to be more densely populated than this, because the most important novels are in everyone's mind, and will get tagged and assessed first. This appears to be happening, as 4.4 of all rated novels are rated Top, 21.9% is rated at least High and 77,2% is rated Mid or more.

Would you find it acceptable to just sit and wait, and watch these figures evolve? And when we are almost done assessing these articles do a final check to reach the percentages I mentioned? Errabee 20:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, Kevinalewis. Regeane

Hello, I'm Nimue

hello Kevinalewis, I'm Nimue. My friend Regeane just recently introduced me to this wiki community just a few days ago so I'm pretty much learning all the ropes from her.

Lady Nimue of the Lake 09:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Banner Question

Hello, thanks for the feedback on the Clive Cussler novel articles I have been working on. I do have a question regarding some of the additions I noticed you made to some of the discussion pages. I noticed that you added the Novels WikiProject banner to the various incomplete articles which is fine, I was adding them as I completed work, but was wondering about the articles that you also tagged with the incomplete info box banner. I thought that I had completed all of the relevant information for each box so I was surprised to see the tag. What information needs to be added? Thanks! --Ulysses411 22:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

No worries. Here is an example article Talk:Trojan Odyssey. Take a look and if the box looks complete to you let me know and I will remove the banners on the other pages. Thanks! --Ulysses411 23:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Help!!!!!!!

How do I insert an image into the infobox? Could you do it for me on the page The Bone Doll's Twin?

It Takes a Family - My edit

Hi, I just edited the "It Takes a Family" page and put in the ISBN details, but it shows awfully:

It Takes a Family

Author	Rick Santorum
Language	English
Subject	Family Political
Genre	Non-Fiction
Publisher	Intercollegiate Studies Institute
Publication date	July 4, 2005
Media type	Novel
Pages	495
ISBN	1-932236-29-5

Just at the end, in particular, where it shows as:

{{{title}}}. ISBN 1-932236-29-5.

I was wondering if (since you seem to know what you're doing) you could fix it, or show me how... Or both (so I don't harass you next time).

That'd be great!

Lincalinca 09:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You don't need the template - raw WikiMedia handles ISBNs all it needs is the "ISBN" in front. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My J'Accuse re Huckleberry Finn

You wrote: "bear in mind that this is all edited on a voluntary basis and the work is from all of us."
-- I've been contributing to the Wikipedia since 2001. Got it.  :-)
Thanks for your response. -- Writtenonsand 20:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for response

Kevin, thanks for the response on how to handle spoilers. I think that I will go with that suggestion and put in (or demarcate) plot introductions and then take the plot summary further. It's difficult because I, as a user, wouldn't want to read a spoiler for a mystery novel, but then for that very reason I wouldn't look one up on Wikipedia. I think that it's fair to assume that a user would expect and/or want a summary that took in at least the principal points of a mystery novel to the end. If you get a chance, please check the Death in the Clouds entry, which I have reworked along the suggested lines. --Sordel 12:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Death Comes as the End

Thanks for assessing that, Kevin. You were somewhat quick off the mark ... I think that I added the first edition artwork subsequent to your assessment, but it won't change the rating. I'm not sure of the publication date: the earlier version of the article gave 1944, and I've seen that elsewhere. Copyright and first UK publication are given as 1945 on the book itself, though, so I've gone with that. There's a chance that it might have been published earlier in another market. --Sordel 08:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Invite

Kevin, thank you for drawing the Collaboration page to my attention. Yes, it seems like something to which I should contribute ... especially as I begin to get a sense of the amount of work that there is to do for the Novels Project. I assume that one just participates (i.e. there is no list of members as with the Novels Project)? The only problem that I can foresee immediately is that I am not in academia so do not have access to the books from which a proper article should be put together. Also, I expect that my enthusiasm will wax & wane ... but then, that's what Wikipedia is all about! --Sordel 11:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, I'll certainly contribute as well to the extent I can. Errabee 00:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Catch-22 Aarfy

Hi there I saw that you have classified "Aarfy" Aardvark as a start page and of low importance. For my information (as I have rewritten these three pages) how does it compare to Orr which is B/Mid and Doc Daneeka which is start/Mid both of which you also rated - and why the differences (from my perspective they are all of very similar standard/importance). Also I might as well ask now, as I will be trying to bring all of these pages up to standard, - what is lacking (I know my english is not fantastic - so hopfully I will get someone else to come along and copy edit) but what else is lacking to bring it up to GA or FA.

Cheers, am grateful for you time --Lethaniol 11:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

been getting a bit punch drunk with too much wiki work. Reclassed to B/Mid. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Probably slightly too many formal sub-headings for the amount of textual content, you havegf tried to add something for each heading - but probably not enough to warrant the heading. And yes you do need more on the notability issues, such as a ==Literary significance & criticism== & ==Allusions/references from other works==

Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers again - --Lethaniol 11:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Project boxes

Kevin, as you have noted, I have been adding project boxes as and when. Thanks for evaluating Crooked House: stub and mid sounds right to me and it's what I would have put myself, I think. Is it okay for me to start assessing as I go? I know that I don't need your permission, exactly, but you're probably the editor who has had the most to do with what I have done, so you'd have some idea about whether my allocations were within the general framework of the project. --Sordel 11:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

From what I've seen of what you do I would say - go for it. Just be cautious. If in doubt leave it unclassified. Thanks for all the help by the way. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Literally, my pleasure. Once the collaboration task shifts to something more accessible or in my line I'll give that some attention as well. --Sordel 13:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Catch-22 Major - de Coverly

Hi Kevinalewis - as you can see I am slowly getting my way through these characters. Two questions

• Major —— de Coverly is rated as Start - but as he is a minor character, and there really is little more to say about him, and he is unlikely to be referenced in the lit etc.. should the article have a different level either B, or is there a cat for short articles that can never be great as there is so little info to be had?

• Second you seem very busy with this Project - full credit - would it be easier if when I write up the articles I rate them - based on the level you have given the previous characters. E.g. if written to same level - all characters B/Mid. I know this is not strictly the thing to do - but you have already done the initial assessment. When I then work on the major characters and the main Catch-22 article looking for GA and beyond I can then request re-assessment.

Keep up the good work, Cheers --Lethaniol 12:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

all seems fine to me - al your assumptions are correct. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

334

Thanks for reassessing 334 (novel) after my recent changes. I have a couple of questions... I know I also need to spend more time on the WikiProject Novels page, but if I may ask you too:

1. What would you say are the main areas to address in this article to get it closer to Good quality?

I would say it is looking fairly good already. The most obvious addition might be a "spoiler free" ==Plot introduction== (see discussion below), some more inline citations, and a ==Release details== formatted as in the pattern template. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

1. I see you fixed the section headings to correspond to the template. Not to nit-pick, but... among the template's very thorough list of desired section headings (a little too thorough to my mind, but I wasn't there for the discussion) there are separate ones for "allusions to other works" and "allusions to actual events etc." By that scheme, I'd have to add a whole section just for the one point about the Burke & Hare murders, because that's not "other works". Is it really awful to collapse those into a single "allusions and references" section as I did? Also, I still don't understand at all why we're repeating the book title in the "Characters" section, but I know that's already been discussed.

By using common heading between articles we gain a consistency that aids the reader moving from one novel article to another. Also it provides a suitable home for similar material for follow on editors to slot into the scheme provided. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

1. Is it really necessary to move the "spoilers" warning up so far? The beginning of that section just covers the basic background and premise of the novel, and talks about its structure.

Understandable, but is all about consistency. The ==Plot introduction== is intended for spoiler free description of the storyline and should be readable for anyone who "might" like to think about reading the novel. The ==Plot summary== is a "Spoilable" zone for those who, don't mind, are studying the novel, want to remind themselves etc. This may look like it should be spoiler marked only at the end say for "mystery novel" but for many the stories major development lines could be a "spoilt" plot. It think we can be a bit flexible on this one, but the aim should err towards consistency again. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again... ←Hob 19:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah whoops, it looks like it may have been User:Errabee who did the rating, so I'll direct at least the first of those questions to Errabee. ←Hob 00:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:BOOKS assessment

Actually it was started in 26 April 2006, but it has been pretty stagnant. I was aware of the automatic indexing, but it seemed like too much work :). Perhaps Novels and Books should merge their assessment to avoid duplicate assessment boxes in article talk pages (if WP:BOOKS goes to bot assissted indexing), but still have both WP:WikiProjects assessing separately...? Something to consider. P.S. Check out the new Biography box in Portal:Literature. Best, feydey 10:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Assessment request

Hi, do you think Erast Fandorin would stand a chance at being awarded GA-grade? Could you please give some feedback on how to enhance it even further? Thanks in advance, Errabee 15:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I've nominated it as a GA candidate. Errabee 23:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

For you!

		The Original Barnstar
		For your hard work rating and classifying articles for WikiProject Novels. -- Merope 13:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Over 19,000 edits and this is your first barnstar?! Clearly you do not do it for one, but I certainly appreciate your hard work. -- Merope ^Talk 13:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Short stories and Novels Wikiproject

I was just reading the discussion about whether short story collections should have the project banner. I'm curious as to whether I should have the project banner on some of the Simon Templar books. For example, The Brighter Buccaneer or Boodle (The Saint)? These are clearly short story collections and any links between the stories are tenuous at best. On the other hand other Saint books such as Once More the Saint, being novella collections, probably qualify since if the novellas were published separately they'd qualify for the project since it includes that format. (In fact there are several Saint novellas that were published on their own as well as in collections.) Thoughts? Should the project banner come down from the Saint short story collections? I think it's also used on the two James Bond short story collections as well. 23skidoo 21:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Difficult one isn't it. I have tried to keep the original project brief which would naturally exclude short stories. However I bent them a bit to be inclusive of Novellas. Should we debate a formal change of policy and define the project as Novels, Novellas and Short stories. It might make more sense of this type of problem. Obviously Graphic novels, plays, manga, light novels etc would stay out of scope! If you agree propose the change on the GeneralForum and I would support it!. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll give it some thought. I'm stuck in an enforced semi-Wikibreak due to workload at my job but when I have a chance to put my thoughts in order I'll do so. My feeling is novellas should be included since so many readers do not recognize (or are necessarily aware of) the differences. Short stories by themselves are pretty cut-and-dried, and I think a case can be made that short story collections probably fall outside the scope ... but it gets complex if you deal with collections where the stories are somehow linked. A very good example is the first Doctor Who: Decalog book which was a series of short stories by different authors, yet each was linked by a common theme and one of the stories was a linking story connecting them all. Yet I've never heard of that book being called a novel... Yeah, it's a toughie. 23skidoo 21:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I appear to have jumped into the middle of this discussion with my edits of Little Altars Everywhere. I saw Kevin's direction in this discussion to leave the banners off a proposed article on The Collected Stories of Vernor Vinge, and interpreted that to mean that story collections are outside the scope of the Novels project. So I removed the banners from Little Altars Everywhere. I hope that was the right thing to do.

I'd say that an equivalent project for anthologies and/or short story collections is needed. I notice that Wikipedia currently has an article and a stub tag for anthologies, but nothing more specific. There are categories for "Anthologies", "Fiction anthologies", and "Single-author short story collections". This seems inconsistent to me. Shouldn't each book category have a corresponding stub tag?

I was under the impression that the term "anthology" mean a collection of short stories by different authors (like the Doctor Who book that 23skidoo mentions), and a book of short stories by the same author was a "story collection". But the anthology article doesn't mention that distinction, so perhaps I was mistaken. Pat Berry 17:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This Saturday or Sunday

I can re-run that list, anyothers? —— Eagle (ask me for help) 13:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)