Talk:World War Z

message: ;Relation to The Zombie Survival Guide: The phrase "deadpan previous book" is awkward; one would expect the introductory adjective to be something a little more basic, such as the literary genre, time of publication or format. Ideally, the tone of the first book should be dealt with in the same clause as that of the second. Skomorokh 16:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We are told that the novel "follows the "laws" set up" in the guide; this is the first we read of these laws, and given that the nature of the guide is not explained, a little more context might help here. I'm not sure "set up" is the best description of what Brooks did with the laws either. Skomorokh 16:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow I did not expect a response so soon, thanks.  As to your first point, originally this article did have a section concerning how the zombies acted in regards to the Guide, but some editors found it to be irrelevant and it was cut down to the sourced portion that is now in the lead.  Maybe instead the statement can be moved to a "Development" section where there can be a short summary of how the zombies act, plus some information about events that the author spoke of in interviews about how the book was developed. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 22:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a great idea. I certainly think it is relevant, given that the guide is mentioned in several of the reviews. Glad to help, Skomorokh 12:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I'll start work on some of these suggestions as soon as I get the chance, or unless some other editor wants to do it in the meantime. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 22:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No rush. Skomorokh 12:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Made some changes to the lead. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 02:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added the development section, comments? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 02:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The development section is a little disjointed at present. The opening line is decent, and then it goes into a description of the zombies from the Guide before veering off into a new paragraph starting "Brooks said he was motivated to write World War Z by his fear of zombies." Ideally, it would be best to have a smoother, more natural flow when switching topics, but I understand that you are constrained by what the sources allow. If we could track down all the mentions of the Guide in the reviews of the novel, a fuller section might be possible. Skomorokh 02:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead section

message: ;Time Out Chicago review:
:The Time Out Chicago review is slightly mischaracterised. Our article:
:Time Out Chicago:
:The brilliance claim would seem to relate more to "Bending horror to the form of alternative history...in the mode of Studs Terkel" than "oral history". Skomorokh 12:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How does the new version look? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 21:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, no mischaracterisation in the new version. Skomorokh 02:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literary significance and reception 

message: There's a short Chicago Tribune piece from May 4, 2--9 here that might be of use. Skomorokh 03:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I saw that too, thanks.  Not sure how to work it in yet. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 03:34, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New source 

message: The article states that this book is a follow-up to TZSG, and follows the "laws" set by it, but that doesn't seems somewhat inaccurate.  In reality, as well as within the world of the book, The Guide was written before World War Z (both the book and the event).  However, The Guide reads like it's intended for a world where zombies are not only in existence, but also somewhat commonplace.  It even goes so far as to list several instances of Zombie Outbreaks going back (as far as I can remember) to the 1800s.  
However, the way that World War Z reads, it makes it seem that zombies weren't really around until shortly before the war.  If WWZ is really supposed to be a follow-up to TZSG, then that seems like a serious continuity issue.  --TwilightDuality (talk) 06:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Brooks stated that the Guide is from the same universe of World War Z. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 15:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Source? --TwilightDuality (talk) 06:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Its already listed on the article but you can see it here:  Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 15:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Actually the zombie outbreak that consumes the world in World War Z starts with an Chinese child who is bitten while diving down to a shipwreck with his father. That fits with the first book which includes several stories about zombies that wandered onto the shore after becoming infected while on ships years ago. The first book tells accounts of stage 1-3 outbreaks which are contained for the most part while the second book covers the 4th and final 'Stage 4 outbreak' which is a totally un-contained world-wide outbreak.F4M !! 20:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to ''The Zombie Survival Guide'' 

message: The article is misquoting Aintitcool.com.  When I checked the source, the quote in question ("This isn’t just a good adaptation of a difficult book... it’s a genre-defining piece of work that could well see us all arguing about whether or not a zombie movie qualifies as “Best Picture” material.") is not a commentary on the leaked script, but rather the concerned author's opinion on the possible impact of a film adaptation of this book, should it be handled correctly.  --TwilightDuality (talk) 06:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have to disagree. Reading the quote again and taking in the entire article, it seems he is talking about the leaked script itself.  Does anyone want to give a third opinion? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 17:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aintitcool.com Quote 

message: * http://www.fangoria.com/home/news/112-sdcc/3408-sdcc-09-max-brooks-talks-what-else-zombies.html  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources 

message: Removed the following - "Production designer Daniel LuVisi posted a piece of concept art depicting the Battle of Yonkers on DeviantArt in January 2009.[37]" due to WP:UNDUEWEIGHT The referenced article makes no claim that LuVisi has been hired to work on the film. The artwork "was put together as a try-out." It's fanart. --Donkey Hotay (talk) 06:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concept Art 

message: Has there been any actual confirmation that this site is actually connected to the upcoming film adaptation for WWZ? Or was this just a case of putting 2 and 2 together?--Nick??? 12:33, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film links question 

message: FYI. Ikip (talk) 09:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of zombie novels]]

message: Is there any confirmation that this website is actually related to the movie?  Having read the book I don't see the connection unless they plan on changing some of the fundamentals of the story.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.236.199 (talk) 04:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Itstartswiththeflu.com? 

message: The book details that infection was just one of many problems facing survivors trying to survive at sea..just a thought  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.109.107.253 (talk) 16:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with "running to the sea"  

message: IMDB has moved the content to their pay service IMDB-Pro. The link effectively points to an ad. Is there a reason it is still here or can it be removed?
92.116.253.194 (talk) 11:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur - that's a pretty pointless link now, at least for the 'external links' section. Kuru (talk) 13:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to IMDB 

message: Is it just me, or is the plot summary getting a little overlong and overdetailed. Is it time to trim off some of the fat? -- saberwyn 00:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary...time to prune? 

message: If zombies freeze and I assume die then how does Iceland become infested as opposed to a sanctuary?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.21.180.41 (talk) 18:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you ask at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous .Wzrd1 (talk) 03:23, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Iceland is not a "cold cold cold country". It is warmed by the Gulf Stream and average temperatures are usually above zero Celcius. Iceland is also volcanically active. It is Greenland that is colder - although not hugely, every degree is significant close to freezing point. Much of the land mass is covered with ice sheets. Greenland was supposedly named so in an early and possibly unsucessful form of marketing by the exiled Erik the Red. Tomásdearg92 (talk) 13:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does Iceland a cold cold cold country become infested? 

message: The following line has been removed from the "Film adaptation" section of the article, as the source article is on a blacklised url (examiner.com), and is a dead link.
Despite his lack of artistic control, Brooks did say that the movie "has to be epic ... and if it isn't the Lord of the Rings of zombie movies, I don't want to see it get made."
-- saberwyn 10:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless, it is what he was quoted saying. To suggest otherwise is to run afoul of WP:OR and WP:NPOV. You gave your personal opinion, which is original research and your point of view, rather than a well respected source to provide that information. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOTFORUM#Wikipedia_is_not_a_publisher_of_original_thought .Wzrd1 (talk) 03:33, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed quote from blacklisted source 

message: "He also cites the U.S. Army as a reference[5] on firearm statistics, though he does not state how those statistics were obtained."
Why would he need to state how those statistics were obtained? Surely we should, by default, assume that he obtained them in the normal way, which is why it's not specifically stated?
This sounds like it's slightly biased against him, as if it's accusing him of something.97.126.163.174 (talk) 10:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral wording? 

message: Does room exist for comment on its use in academia, I say this in reference to a new book explaining international theory that mention issues raised in this novel. International relations and zombies hyperlink--Tb7416 (talk) 13:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Were such content to be added, it would probably fit under the "Literary significance and reception" heading. I can't see any references to WWZ on the Amazon page you linked (apart from "Buy Me!" links)...is the claim of academic use of WWZ made in a reliably published review, or clearly and in depth in the book (actual discussion in the text as opposed to footnotes/references)? Those are about the ony two ways I could see it being incorporated in this context. -- saberwyn 23:55, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sensible appraisal.Blade-of-the-South (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence in academia 

message: There's been a bit of back and forth in this section over the past few days whether to mention one of the filming locations. At the moment, singling out a single location doesn't fit with the current quantity of content. However, I think that having a single-sentance section (even if it is main-linked out to another article) is a bit lacklustre for an otherwise high-quality article, and the section should expand to a couple of paragraphs summarising the film article. As a suggestion (someone will have to lift the relevant cites from the film article):
Once the film is released (or the information otherwise comes available), a second paragraph discussing major differences between the book and the film, and a summary of reactions/reviews could be added. Thoughts? -- saberwyn 00:01, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It just seems redundant to me, interested parties can just read the main article but it is better than just calling out a single location. However, keep in mind that unlike a lead section any information in this section must be properly referenced.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:39, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  good point Blade-of-the-South (talk) 08:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Film adaptation" section 

message: "John McElroy" is listed as a voice actor in the audiobook. The page it links to is of a man who died in the 1980s. The only other John McElroy on Wikipedia is even older. Either the link needs to remain disabled, a page needs to be made for the correct John McElroy, or that name is wrong completely. I am deactivating the link for now.
-Seth  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.195.219.46 (talk) 14:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch -- saberwyn 23:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok Blade-of-the-South (talk) 22:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audiobook Section Errors 

message: And Brooks refused to have Pitt on a new re-edition (and the sales of the re-edition?). --Niemti (talk) 07:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lacks the info about selling the rights for $1m 

message: Not a very good rating. Might improve the article to see its rating. Maybe not.  http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/world-war-z/ 
This ones a tiny bit higher. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816711/
Blade-of-the-South (talk) 08:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are editing the wrong article. This article is about the book. For the film, which has a significantly different plot, please go to World War Z (film). Andrew Oakley (talk) 08:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Critical Reception

message: The length of the plot summary is a bit excessive, I think. The article is 3000 words total, and the plot summary takes 1300+ words of it. Some of the detail can be trimmed. I don't think we could reach 700 (as suggested by WP:FILMPLOT, which may not apply here but is a good yardstick), but by trimming detail from the last paragraph we could get at least under 1000. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 18:13, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot length 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on World War Z. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081220092510/http://www.untitledbooks.com:80/pages/features/index.asp?FeaturesID=74 to http://www.untitledbooks.com/pages/features/index.asp?FeaturesID=74
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131106051656/http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6359995.html?nid=2286 to http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6359995.html?nid=2286
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:01, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on World War Z. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131106001755/http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6376416.html to http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6376416.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131106011734/http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6376146.html to http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6376146.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There are several asterisks listed after names in the list of the audiobook cast indicating that they should refer to a note, however I see no such note.
I would assume that the marked names would be either the cast in the original abridged audiobook or the ones added to the unabridged version. But this is just a guess on my part.
Either way, the asterisks should be removed or (more ideally) have their note found and added. 2607:FB90:220A:BD3C:5C34:412C:2FF:ADAB (talk) 17:58, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asterisks (*) in the Audiobook Cast 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on World War Z. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090620142147/http://www.audiopub.org/audies07winners.asp?page=1 to http://www.audiopub.org/audies07winners.asp?page=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As of 08/18/2020, the plot section is excessively detailed, sitting at over 3300 words, and could use some cleaning up. I am hoping to work on paring it down a bit, but if anyone else can provide assistance as well, that'd be great.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julio144 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overly detailed plot section