Talk:The Famous Five

message: ===Jul/Aug 2006===
Since it is not clear what surname the four children bear, and it is scarcely an issue in the books, couldn't we just list the characters without surnames, as they appear in the books? And alter the linked stubs from (e.g.) "Julian Kirrin" to "Julian (Famous Five)". Myopic Bookworm 16:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is only of the surname of Julian, Dick and Anne; George's is explicitly stated many times. Since both names are referred to in the books, I don't see the point of completely removing the information, as it does not take up much of the article and is a point of interest. Whether the most plausible surname is Kirrin or Barnard is debatable (Kirrin was listed as it seems to be the most popularly accepted and, as far as I know, the name used in the television adaptations), but it is not Bannard, as the article had previously stated. And I 17:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I wouldn't want to remove the information, but listing the characters as "Julian Kirrin" etc. seems to foreclose the debate. (And book-purists will not take kindly to having the TV series taken as canonical.) I'd refer to them by first name, and keep the note about surname. Myopic Bookworm 09:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough point, I must have misread. And I 14:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In Five go to Billycock Hill, the five are introduced as "Julian Kirrin, Dick Kirrin, Anne Kirrin, and George Kirrin, their cousin - and their dog Timothy"
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.7.47.195 (talk) 05:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: To complicate matters further, it's not that unusual for a man to take his wife's surname (or combine them) when she brings property into the family. Maintaining the name is important in some circles. So Kirrin could well be Quentin's surname and not his brother's. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  In the first book of the series, "Kirrin" is given as the name of George's mother's family - the island and the cottage are named for her ancestors, not her husband's. So I always thought that George's surname was not Kirrin, since it would be unlikely that Uncle Quentin would change his surname to his wife's. Since Julian's mother is Mrs Barnard, I assumed that Quentin's name must also be Barnard unless Quentin and his brother had different fathers. So surely George must also be a Barnard? 79.179.62.156 (talk) 20:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Surname Debate 

message: Since it is not clear what surname the four children bear, and it is scarcely an issue in the books, couldn't we just list the characters without surnames, as they appear in the books? And alter the linked stubs from (e.g.) "Julian Kirrin" to "Julian (Famous Five)". Myopic Bookworm 16:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is only of the surname of Julian, Dick and Anne; George's is explicitly stated many times. Since both names are referred to in the books, I don't see the point of completely removing the information, as it does not take up much of the article and is a point of interest. Whether the most plausible surname is Kirrin or Barnard is debatable (Kirrin was listed as it seems to be the most popularly accepted and, as far as I know, the name used in the television adaptations), but it is not Bannard, as the article had previously stated. And I 17:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I wouldn't want to remove the information, but listing the characters as "Julian Kirrin" etc. seems to foreclose the debate. (And book-purists will not take kindly to having the TV series taken as canonical.) I'd refer to them by first name, and keep the note about surname. Myopic Bookworm 09:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough point, I must have misread. And I 14:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In Five go to Billycock Hill, the five are introduced as "Julian Kirrin, Dick Kirrin, Anne Kirrin, and George Kirrin, their cousin - and their dog Timothy"
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.7.47.195 (talk) 05:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jul/Aug 2006

message: In a review of Five Get Into a Fix on enidblyton.net the reviewer, Keith Robinson, says "I've been told that in the original books Julian's mother is referred to as Mrs Barnard. There's no mention of her name in the later version I have, and I have to assume it's been altered due to the fact that it's a glaring error on Blyton's part—for as we all know, Julian's father is Uncle Quentin's brother, which makes both families Kirrin".  
I believe that the assertion ...Julian's father is Uncle Quentin's brother... is substantiated in Five on a Treasure Island, so it appears that the surname of all the children is Kirrin, and Blyton made a mistake in FGIAF which was later corrected. Does anyone have the relevant editions of FGIAF so this could be substantiated? RichardEll 11:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To complicate matters further, it's not that unusual for a man to take his wife's surname (or combine them) when she brings property into the family. Maintaining the name is important in some circles. So Kirrin could well be Quentin's surname and not his brother's. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  In the first book of the series, "Kirrin" is given as the name of George's mother's family - the island and the cottage are named for her ancestors, not her husband's. So I always thought that George's surname was not Kirrin, since it would be unlikely that Uncle Quentin would change his surname to his wife's. Since Julian's mother is Mrs Barnard, I assumed that Quentin's name must also be Barnard unless Quentin and his brother had different fathers. So surely George must also be a Barnard? 79.179.62.156 (talk) 20:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Feb 2007

message: "with lashings of ginger beer" - an oft-quoted cliché but never actually mentioned in any of the 21 books
Wasn't this "cliché" coined by The Comic Strip when they made the spoof Five Go Mad In Dorset in 1982? 217.155.20.163 00:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a feeling that "lashings of cream" occurs in one of the books - but I wouldn't remember which one now.  If a similar phrase including "lashings" occurs occasionally, it is by no means the overused cliché it is often portrayed as being, usually by those who want to denigrate Enid Blyton's work. M.J.E. (talk) 06:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Lashings of ginger beer

message: The first books in the series were written during the 1940s, and some of the basic concepts can now seem extremely outdated.
Is it really necessary to point out that books written 60 years ago may contain "outdated concepts"? 217.155.20.163 23:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Extremely outdated" 

message: I just added a new sub-section about the upcoming animated TV series, then realised there was already a section about it at the end of the article (doh!). However, I decided that it would be more appropriate to list the 2008 series after the 1978 and 1996 series, rather than in its own section right at the very end, even though the new series is not about the original characters. My new bit moreover contains information that I have just found on the Chorion Web site. So I have now merged the two sections and deleted the "New Series" section at the end. In doing so, I endeavoured to include as much info from the old section as possible. But I deleted the comment about it being debatable whether the TV series will be true to the spirit of the books. Just personally, I share the scepticism of many Enid Blyton fans about it, but such a comment is subjective, and it is important for Wikipedia articles to remain as objective as possible.
Nzyowie 10:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New TV Series 

message: :Image:Famous.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) 06:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Famous.jpg

message: :Image:Famousfive 198.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) 06:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Famousfive 198.jpg

message: why were they famous?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.32.8 (talk) 09:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: alliteration? 152.91.9.219 (talk) 02:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: famous?

message: Please dismerge the Informations of this site to the 1978 serial and the article: "Famous Five 1978 television series". In the moment this splitting looks not good.
Please make comments to the article history of this article in the article subject, so that the source will be to see. By the way the Germant article site owns a similar structure, but the splitting is complete. with friendly greetings, Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 10:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a first stept, gives the article a reasonable order today. And I have placed informations to the english audio dramas. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 10:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famous Five 1978 television series  

message: I've nominated both of the above: they are short articles with no sources, and both have been tagged for notability for a couple of years, with no substantial improvements made to either. If anyone wishes to argue in favour of keeping either of the articles, the tags at the top of those pages lead you through to the appropriate place to state reasons  ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 23:55, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Nominated for deletion - [[Kirrin Island]] & [[Kirrin Cottage]]

message: We can surely take it that the new kids' dog is not Timmy's son - Timmy would have been senile by the time the original characters were married even if they were all unusually precocious, and any dog fathered by him would be elderly before the first of the children hit double figures. Captain Pedant (talk) 23:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the Case 

message: Hello,
Thank you for your great article. I have a question : In the Television - 1978 series section of your article, you wrote the following :
Of the original 21 novels, 3 were not adapted for this series; Five on a Treasure Island and Five Have a Mystery to Solve.
Now which book title is the third? Or is it just a typo and it should have been : 2 were not adapted ?
Thank you for correcting, as I'm using this infomation for my own article. 
Best Regards from France, where this 1978 T.V. series is very much loved (and so are many other great British shows).
--Debole (talk) 14:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read the complete sentence, it says "Five on a Treasure Island and Five Have a Mystery to Solve (were not adapted) because the Children's Film Foundation still had the film and TV rights to the books, while Five Have Plenty of Fun didn't fit in the production schedule."  ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 23:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo, error or oversight ? 

message: "She also wrote The Famous Five survival guide."
Well, according to the linked sources, no, she didn't.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.24.233.209 (talk) 07:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survival Guide 

message: I wouldn't know of any reliable sources regarding the whereabouts of MG. There is indication she actually died, but in the article it is presented as a fact that it isn't! Otherwise give sources please, on such sensitive topic!
91.44.229.199 (talk) 22:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michele Gallagher fate 

message: The article quality is quite low. It is not able to convey the vibrant spirit of the FAMOUS FIVE novels. Beyond that, the precedence of the listing of the names should be George, Timmy, Julian, Dick & Anne. That is how they are placed inside the novels. The stories more or less revolve around the first two characters, and the other three joining to create the FIVE. 
As to the delineation of George as a Tomboy, it is a most mediocre assessment of her character. She is just trying to escape the standard definition of a girl as coy, and less capable. In fact, she is seen as quite an able persons, with good athletic, swimming and rowing skills.  
The article is not able to delve deep into the stories. At the same time, unjustifiable stress and importance is given to the parodies and other frill elements. These things should be moved to another article and do not fit inside here, other than as a mere mention and link. 
The article needs a definite improvement. Maybe a rewriting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.214.21.100 (talk) 10:23, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is an encyclopedia article about the novel, so no it does not need to convey the vibrant spirit of the novels. And I don't know I'm pretty sure the members are usually sorted the way it's sorted in the article.--Krystaleen 13:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitely feel the article doesn't quite fit the books. It seems to have got bogged down in listing every single adaptation rather than giving a feel of what the books are about (which shouldn't be hard since they're often rather repetitive). While I'm no lit-crit person or expert on Blyton's life, I think obvious candidate things to add more on if sources can be found are 1) talking about the style of a novel, 2) research process - based on specific places/characters or idealized?, 3) setting her treatment of class and crime in a modern context (it's pretty scary on rereading how often baddies are telegraphed as obvious wrong 'uns by their having 'lower-class' dialect accents written phonetically), 4) treatment of women-is George meant to be brave? the future of women? just weird? a mixture of both?). These are frankly some of the most-read British books of the pre-/post-WWII period and I think they deserve a level of detailed treatment matching that (even if that might occasionally be more than they deserve). I hope the source I added helps at least a bit. A few screenshots from the 90s TV adaptation (since it's better-shot and matches Blyton's period) would be nice if we can justify fair use on them. Blythwood (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low quality article 

message: What is Dick's full name? I think I remember it was mentioned somewhere that it was not Richard but something like Dickins. Or probably Dick itself was the full form? Which is correct? Hellerick (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dick's name 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Famous Five (series). 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/20080531160727/http://www.chorion.co.uk:80/chorion/brand/famfive to http://www.chorion.co.uk/chorion/brand/famfive
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 08:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 18:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: I would suggest that the entire 'Critical discussion' section be axed, as a) they're officially discouraged per WP guidelines, and b) it seems to be little more than some individual user's personal gripes with the series, none of which is sourced.  The 'floating timeline' bit seems more reasonable and can stay in. Trilobright (talk) 17:51, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dreadful criticism section 

message: Change "Country: United States", to "Country: United Kingdom"
Article states the books are set in England and Wales. Enid Blyton was an English author. Stating these books as United States origin is indisputably incorrect. 31.78.151.101 (talk) 01:05, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Lightoil (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2023