Talk:Go Down, Moses (book)

message: The third sentence of this article makes no sense. This problem was flagged in the unsigned comment made on March 29, 2015 that said:
"I don't know if anyone is still working on this page, but the third sentence in the introduction makes no sense the way it reads right now. It says: "Though originally considered (by the public) a collection of short stories, Faulkner stood to be the object of all masculine pronouns." It seems like two sentences have been accidentally pushed together. The first should read something like "Though originally considered a collection of short stories, Faulkner claimed that the work was actually a novel." And the second should note the fact that Ike McCaslin is the implied antecedent of many of the work's unspecified masculine pronouns."
   
The problem this comment identified appears to have been introduced on March 9 by 199.80.82.66. This section of the previous version ended with "Though originally considered (by the public) a collection of short stories, Faulkner insisted in his later years that the book was truly a novel."  Restoring that would leave the fragment "to be the object of all masculine pronouns." I don't know anything about the story so I don't know if the comment above is right, but it would be nice to have it fixed by someone who knows the story. Thanks. Summertime4 (talk) 15:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably getting pulled because an image that cannot be edited by others in any way is not wiki.  If you wrote it as text (I'm well aware of how complicated that'd be), describing each person in some way, it would stay as an article. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:03, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Third sentence of Intro makes no sense

message: Yes, you are quite right about Tennie's Jim.  I fixed it.  66.240.10.170 23:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tennie's Jim

message: I could have sworn someone put up a Go, Down Moses section about the final story.  Where did that go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.240.10.170 (talk • contribs) 23:10, January 24, 2006
:I've now restored it. It was deleted by the editor who created it,  Cranston Lamont (perhaps accidentally?) Paul August ☎ 23:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I thought I saw Go Down Moses??

message: What about "The Bear?"  It is one of Faulkner's more famous stories, and is the longest in the book.  There shuld be a section on it. 129.44.216.105 21:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Bear?

message: :Image:Godownmoses.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 18:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Godownmoses.jpg

message: I have noticed that portions of the plot summary (cf. "The Bear") are copied directly from the Sparknotes guide to the novel. Is there a Wikipedia policy on plagiarism of this sort of thing?
Synecdoche (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism?

message: I honestly don't know if that was intentional or just awkward writing, but if there's any way we could keep that style while actually formatting the article in a useful and professional way, that'd be awesome. 2602:306:CCBB:C760:1A:C93A:DE8B:8BE3 (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  As amusing as it is for this article to be written in a stream of consciousness...