Jump to content

Talk:Joe Abercrombie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Best Served Cold is a stand alone book and not a sequel to the trilogy. Unless someone disagrees I will cut that bit out of the sentence at the end of the week.

Hey I just added a link to the article for The Blade Itself. --Jane Lorn (talk) 16:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

[edit]

This article seems to be written in a profoundly non-encyclopedic tone; it was enough to give me a hunch that it was done by Mr. Abercrombie himself or by those who know him personally. This should be cleaned up. The random list of links to interviews had no purpose in this article.

I know in the past there's been a lot of debate over whether unnoteworthy authors like Abercrombie should have pages. My thought would be this is a candidate for deletion if it isn't seriously cleaned up.Synthfin (talk) 22:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least you are now discussing - but since it is after the deletion of content (again, cited at that) I have reverted it. I don't know which old account you may have been, but you appear to have forgotten that there are processes for the removal of content and WP:BOLD and WP:IAR are not the only policies that apply. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know the process but reverting the article to its original form isn't helping. Anyone who reads this knows it needs a serious clean up. The author and publisher have no place making these types of entries. Wikipedia doesn't exist to promote authors. This is meant article should have an encyclopedic tone. It needs to be trimmed and cleaned up. I removed the irrelevant interviews and such. Those are nonsense.Synthfin (talk) 22:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have noted my general concerns at your talkpage. You may wish to respond there. I am shortly retiring for the night, but will check up again tomorrow. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any of the information removed as unduly self-promoting and support their inclusion. The external links are also appropriate per WP:ELYES, specifically "interview transcripts" in bullet 3. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 00:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The interview links are ridiculous. Those should be cut as they only serve to pimp the author. This page needs pruning. It's that simple. Synthfin (talk) 05:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please review WP:ELYES. Point three states that the following should be linked - "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons." Interviews are appropriate and quite common for many authors. If you really believe there are too many, you could try linking them as inline citations; I have no objection to removing an external link that is used as a footnote. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 10:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this is another page that I created and just as I am not Pat Rothfuss, I am also not Joe Abercrombie, though at least I do live on the same landmass as him and have met him (not until some time after I wrote this entry though). If these concerns had been raised at the time I created the page (just after his second book came out) there may have been somewhat more worth discussing the point (although Wikipedia's guidelines do indicate that if a book is published by a reputable publisher's it is worthy of inclusion), but since then his books have gone on to sell over a quarter-million copies, won critical acclaim, been nominated for a slew of prestigious awards (inluding being nominated for the Campbell Award for Best New Author in both years he was eligible) etc etc. Again, if it is felt that the author does not warrant his own page, then by all means put it up for deletion and we will see what other editors think.--Werthead (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, as cited on the page itself, the author was cited by the BBC as a noteworthy up-and-coming fantasy author when they invited him to take part in their 'Worlds of Fantasy' television series last year, alongside authors such as Terry Pratchett. As far as I'm concerned, that puts the author's noteworthiness beyond dispute, but again if others disagree, please feel free to take it to AFD.--Werthead (talk) 00:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right now given my standards for notability (which have been shown in the past to be a couple standard deviations above the norm for the community) I would probably !vote weak delete, but most others would probably be fine with keeping it. Given Abercrombie's talent and buzz, even if I can't find anything unequivocally demonstrating notability right now, eventually it will come. If it does somehow get deleted, consider userfying it until notability is clearly passed. But pass that bridge when it comes, right now I certainly wouldn't bother sending it to AFD. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 01:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joe Abercrombie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Standalone novels are not a trilogy

[edit]

On 7 October 2019, the three standalone novels Best Served Cold, The Heroe, and Red Country were renamed as "The Great Leveller trilogy". This supposedly happened because of their release in an omnibus edition called "The Great Leveller". However, that does make them a trilogy. In fact, everywhere on Abercrombie's very own website, they are consistently referred to as standalone novels, including the page for the omnibus itself: "Collected together for the first time, here are the three hard-hitting standalone novels set in the world of Joe Abercrombie’s bestselling First Law trilogy." I'll therefore revert this change, removing the trilogy label, unless there are reasonable objections. Jack L Rains (talk) 12:04, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joe_Abercrombie&oldid=1197851792"