Talk:The Tale of Despereaux

message: I added the re-write tag. The plot summary is difficult to follow, and doesn't seem to outline a complete plot. The Film section needs a healthy copy-edit at the very least. Since the article is short, it might be more worthwhile to simply rewrite the whole thing...
I am not familiar with the book, so I am not currently able to offer any other assistance. Sorry! 7secondsed 17:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article about the upcoming film should be completely separate (i.e., it needs its own article). There's enough information about the book to expand this article by a great length. It's in pretty bad shape now :-( -DMCer (talk) 18:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Did some third grader write the plot synopsis as part of a book report? Shostie (talk) 23:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seriously 

message: I've removed the succession box. This article is about a novel, not about the history of the Newbery Medal. The books that came before and after are completely unrelated, too.
This idea of succession is appropriate where a single author is involved, or a single series. (It also works to a degree in pop chart ratings, where an artist's popularity in a sense displaces another's.) But here there is no logical connection to the topic. It isn't any more important than the ISBN number that came before.
Finally, it's intrusive. The box caught my eye, I scrolled down, and discovered nothing of interest related to the topic. Piano non troppo (talk) 22:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't believe this was appropriate.  The succession box formed a link in, essentially, a navigation chain of Newbery Award winners, which is now broken on The Tale of Despereaux and nowhere else.  I think if you're going to remove something that's part of a broader context like that, you should be engaging discussion about whether the broader context should exist, not breaking it locally. chaos5023 (talk) 15:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I first couldn't find an appropriate place to introduce the topic. Then, when I did, decided to leave this here, in case the other wasn't seen (which apparently it hasn't been). It's here:  Is that the proper place? Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession box removed

message: I thought we were supposed to be polite. I don't know why, but on the Internet, people seem to forget they're communicating with actual people who have feelings.
Fablina (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 00:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct; we are supposed to be WP:CIVIL. —chaos5023 (talk) 15:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I thought... 

message: Last time I read this book, it was a red tablecloth, a hen, and a handful of cigarettes that Mig's father traded her for.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by StolenApples (talk • contribs) 01:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Carpet? 

message: Hi, I noticed the side box of the page was messed up somehow, I'm posting it here hoping someone can help I don't know how to fix side boxes.Etineskid(talk) 02:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Side Box 

message: For some reason, this article has summarys of Books I, II, and IV, but not Book III. What happened to it? Did this article get rewritten at some point, and it's still waiting for a rewrite of summary for Book III, or was there vandalism that nobody noticed? I'd write the summary myself, but I don't have a copy of the book handy, and don't remember it well enough the summarize from memory. Can someone please help?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.108.22.92 (talk) 02:28, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to "Book III: Gor! The Tale of Miggery Sow?"