Talk:1632 (novel)

message: cc from Lar:
Thanks for your comment, btw, talk: 1632 (novel). I'll think on your input, lean that way myself. Personally, enclopedic standard would eliminate most Pop entries in entirety, so the article would be speedy vote in WP:AFD fm me philosophically speaking. Not 'mature' enough to be noteworthy historically speaking. Unless I see some hope (and examples) that this sort of thing has chance at WP:FA, the book involves too much work to expand much farther. I feel like its waste of time. Got any answers on that concern? (FA examples)  ::<B>Fra</B>nkB 16:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I will respond later... One other tip is that  typically is only placed on articles for a short time. and when a date is given it's usually good to adhere to that date... the date given is now 2-3 days or so in the past so it's not totally unforgivable that the anon reverted the change (although I don't agree). Also your edit comment could have been a bit more charitable, I think. ++Lar: t/c 10:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Response and re-Response

message: ##Glad to hear the FA news.  Could really use a novel article that made that status for an example, or a cite to a specific guideline on this type article.  Suspect there aren't any. At the moment, I'm loosely using the Honor Harrington novels articles.
##My revert tone (I presume you mean using  'clown') is because the action was by IP. See my post to JimboW on that last week for more. In sum, call it merciless comtempt. Discarding hours of work was hardly the 'ethically right' action either! N'est pas?  Inserted after, Comments on User_talk:85.182.9.116#Thanks_But_ No_Thanks_on_the_Vandalism are refered to here and below. <B>Fra</B>nkB 05:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right now, real life needs serviced. I'll be checking back in three hours, give or take. ttfn
Reactions? <B>Fra</B>nkB 20:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Responses to Above Feedback

message: Much later...
*I've just given this article  a top to middle re-read. My first, since I saved it. The critical comments are pretty good. It's not that the writing sucks, it's def. not encylopedic enough.  Does read more like a review which is very bad, I don't have much respect for critics. As a writer I'd rather give them to the inquisition!
::We need to figure what to keep, and what to export, and how to kill the gloss. Probably throw 3 sentences out of 4 in the historical intro away and tighten that up. They should probably be smoothed some and transfered to the series article as well.
:Avalon is probably Avignon... re Section Title: Avignon and its Popes
::"In 1309 the city was chosen by Pope Clement V as his residence..."
::However, the seven popes that resided there returned to Rome well B4 1632 by a wide margin; I did suspect and think I recollect the 1634 book references it as a summer home.
*Just so you know. Mutate as you see fit. I'm too bed. Five consequtive nights up past two at my age!
Not a good idea! <B>Fra</B>nkB 07:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't get very far, as was mostly searching for good examples to follow, though did make some fiddling changes (partial at that). The system is very slow.  I'll clean this up mauch further starting about 22 or 23:00 UTC (5-6 EDST) <B>Fra</B>nkB 16:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avalon-is Avignon w/cite <B>[[User:Fabartus|Fra]]</B>[[User talk:Fabartus|<span style="color:green;">nkB</span>]] 

message: *Chrono-post Alert: See Question and Answer on 'category: 163x' --> 'category: 1632-163x alternate history series'
::<B>Fra</B>nkB 21:33, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ChronoAlert: See Series re cat change 163x--->1632-163x alternate history series <B>[[User:Fabartus|Fra]]</B>[[User talk:Fabartus|<span style="color:green;">nkB</span>]] 

message: Added as the tone of much of the text is too close to advertising. Major change of tone required to make this encyclopedic in style. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup Tag

message: Currently, the entry states that in 1631 a United States of Europe (USE) is formed from cities neighboring Grantville.  This is not entirely accurate.  Mike Stearns and company do form a small nation from the local towns, but it is simply called the United States. 
The United States of Europe isn't formed until the autumn of 1633 after the Battle of Wismar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.242.117.59 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States of Europe 

message: The Text speaks of Weimar, Jena, Saalfeld, Erfurt, Arnstadt and Eisenach being located in the valley of Saale River. This is not true, except for Jena and Saalfeld (as the name implies). Erfurt and Arnstadt lie at Gera River, Weimar at Ilm River and Eisenach at Werra River. So I propose to delete this phrase. All towns are mentioned to lie in Thuringia and this is the smallest region for which that holds true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.64.176.80 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Valley of Saale River 

message: Since there is a linked page for the 1632 series as a whole, I think the The "About the Series" section needs to be drastically shortened. I'm tempted to just go do it, since there are no 2008 comments on this page, and it looks like all of the previous wranglers have gone away.Sherrold (talk) 15:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "About the Series" section 

message: Sadly, I never edited the plot threads article so I didn't know about the deletion discussion nor the merge decision. This 1632(novel) article is not the place for the series plot threads, because only one thread was touched upon in this particular novel. The series plot threads belong in ... the 1632 series article (since the plot thread article was deleted). Some of them are already mentioned under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1632_series#Published_books , but not in in the same way - it divides them out by books. And the 1632 series article is gonna get NASTY long if we kill every other 1632 article and fold it into that one. :(
I don't want to just jump in here and delete the info - but it genuinely doesn't apply to this individual novel. Tkech (talk) 12:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Moving this information here was a mistake.  It should have been moved to the 1632 series article, as it was suggested in the deletion discussion.  The admin who closed it sent it to the wrong place.  Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for doing that. Now I want to prune it within an inch of its life, that's a LOT of cruft in there, lol! I'll wait until another time since we are both online atm. Tkech (talk) 13:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Better a few meters beyond. Jack Merridew 13:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Um. Can you also work your magic on the redirect for 1632 writers which was deleted? It should point to The Grantville Gazettes (plural) article. Tkech (talk) 13:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Also I think the entire 1632 series article needs to be cut down.  Its currently around 70k in length and should be at least only half that long.  Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 14:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Decision 

message: No sources, possible POV or original research. Add sources or it should be deleted/replaced. WesPhil (talk) 20:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy section needs work