Talk:Barnes & Noble

message: One appears to be more a market driven article than the other and the "history" section appears to be quite different Transparent Eye (talk) 15:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are there TWO different articles entitled Barnes & Noble

message: "The music is played louder in this area of the store as a psychological attempt to keep people from over staying." I think the music is usually awful but it isn't really that loud. Sounds POV. MafiaCapo 11:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it seems to be based on the author's subjective opinion. Actually, after reading over the section several times, I edited to remove the entire paragraph about the size, table design, etc., of the cafés. It is unsourced, appears to be an opinion or conclusion, and not only is it unverifiable, it's not really factual: I've been in a number of B&N cafes in different parts of the  country, and the size of the cafe, the cafe tables, the music volume, etc., vary widely, and I don't think anything encyclopedic can be assrted about those things without strong sources. MCB 17:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Having worked @ a B&N I can tell you the cafe` & the music department have their own volume controls. If the department was louder it was due to the employee working in that department.Vea 00:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The music volume comment was completely false and needed to be removed, byt Vea- not all BN stores have the exact same sound system installed. any reasonable person would realize that. Tony P 07:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: Maybe I'll get to it first, but the author of this article seems to be under the impression that one can simply add in a few hundred ","'s and write an entire paragraph in a single sentence.
The word flow on this page makes my reading senses go "ouch". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.113.239.146 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Run-on Sentences than I can Shake a Stick At. 

message: Does anybody have any info about Barnes & Noble expanding to other countries?Maybe Puerto Rico? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BoricuaPR (talk • contribs) 15:49, December 27, 2006 (UTC)
: FYI, Puerto Rico is not another country it is part of the United States. Tom Bonnie 23:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes its true,but since 98% percent of americans don't know it..--BoricuaPR 23:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text: They have no plans to open any stores outside the United States.Allyona (talk) 04:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: I think they still own enough of GameStop to be notable. I know I get my B&N employee discount there. Mustafarox 16:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: you might want to double check that.  I last worked for B&N in May 2005, the Gamestop discount was discontinued before then.  It may have changed since then, just making a note. Deatonjr 16:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm a Barnes and Nobles employee in New York City. I can still walk into a GameStop with my paystub and get a nice 20% off of games. Unfortunately no discount on the platforms. :( So yeah, apparently B&N still owns enough of GameStop to warrant employee discounts. --24.168.116.69 08:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's my understanding what when I worked for Babbages was that one of the Riggio brothers owned the portion of the company and that the discount was done as a courtesy. --Drmike 02:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The discount has been valid at (first Babbages) Gamestop consistently for at least the past 12 years.Allyona (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Gamestop is now a publicly traded company, completely independent of Barnes & Noble, Inc.  Aside from current and former Barnes & Noble Officers and/or Directors serving on the Gamestop Board, Barnes & Noble Inc. and Gamestop Inc. have a strategic partnership with regard to video games sales and distribution via BarnesandNoble.com (a wholly owned subsidiary of Barnes & Noble, Inc.).  As of January, 2008, Barnes & Noble and Gamestop employees receive employee dicount benefits at both Barnes & Noble and Gamestop retail stores. --23 January 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.249.137 (talk • contribs) 07:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gamestop 

message: I have an issue with the "Unlike other bookstores..." bit where it's said that other chains don't do much publishing.  When I ran my Waldenbooks way back when, we had store owned imprint titles as well and they were fairly well featured.  --Drmike 03:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unlike other bookstores... 

message: It seems to me that the section detailing the location of a Starbucks near a Barnes and Noble in Queens, and the subsequent confusion generated by having a Starbucks separate from the bookstore, is unnecessary as it deals with an oddity in only one specific location of a Barnes and Noble, and doesn't really help to flesh out the B&N-Starbucks connection.  If nobody else minds, I'm going to delete this location-specific paragraph. Danberbro (talk) 18:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed -- good edit. --MCB (talk) 00:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of Queen's Café Section 

message: It has been a common mistake, at least in the American English language, to call Barnes and Noble: "Barnes and Nobles."  So much so that the name of the bookseller has been known as Barnes and Nobles for a long time in the English language.  However, this isn't their name.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.119.117 (talk) 17:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common Conversation Mistake 

message: In the Anna Currence article, and in several Crown Books/SEC articles online, it is claimed Anna Currence was a key designer of the B&N Superstore.  I cannot find anything from the B&N side to verify that.  Is that simply a claim that she/Crown made, or is there truth to it somewhere?  --BizMgr (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anna Currence and the Superstore Design 

message: A sign in the window of the Manhattan Flagship prides itself on being "The World's Largest Bookstore". 
I saw it once recently while passing by. Given the factuality of this, I think this is especially noteworthy in the article. Thanks, -Alan 24.184.184.177 (talk) 05:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if it were true. Signs in store windows don't meet our standards for reliable sourcing. --Orange Mike  |  Talk 16:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biggest bookstore in the world? 

message: Does the chain still exist? They seem to have vanished from every mall that I know of.
70.88.213.74 (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. You can find them in the store locator on their website. Jim (talk) 05:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Status of B. Dalton

message: For the most part, this entire article reads more like a statement from the company, than an encyclopedic entry on the book store. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.114.221 (talk) 22:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corporate newsletter 

message: I am looking to find anyone who knows anything about the book The Plant, that Stephen King published through this bookstore on the internet in 2000-01.  I would like to know how many sections where posted.  I have 4, and am looking for the last 2 which I am assuming there were 6 published on the internet.  Please let me know.  98.225.28.218 (talk) 03:53, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stephen Kings, The Plant, an unfinished novel 

message: This sentence is incorrect, even though it appears to have been sourced from Barnes & Nobles' website: "Barnes & Noble began to publish books during the 1980s, when they started reissuing out-of-print titles." I have several reprint titles published by B&N that I purchased in the 1960s, and I was given books in Barnes & Noble's College Outline Series from the 1940s. Also, according to this reference they started publishing children's educational books in 1944 (after taking over Hinds, Hayden & Eldredge). Jim (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History as a publisher 

message: "B. Dalton" redirects here, but the article only mentions that B&N bought B.Dalton in 1987.  There should be an information on the history of B. Dalton before the merger with B&N.  Either there should be a separate article on Dalton, or there should be two sections on history in this one:  One for B&N and another for Dalton.
By the way, can someone verify the date that B&N purchased Dalton?  I remember there was a Dalton in my town in 1994. SlowJog (talk) 04:07, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! That article also answers my "by the way" question. B&N simply didn't convert all the B.Dalton's right away. SlowJog (talk) 14:39, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  B. Dalton? 

message: This entire article needs to be rewritten as there is obvious bias throughout the entire article. From "upscale" to "#1," this article stinks of opinionated information. And sadly, it has not been classified this way.
The characterization of this bookseller as "upscale" is not sourced, and makes no sense.  Since they partner with many small booksellers who resell books for $0.01 on their website, with a low satisfaction rating, they are hardly the model of an upscale business. Selling books previously donated to Salvation Army for $0.01 is hardly an upscale business practice.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.88.143.1 (talk) 03:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising 

message: List this under nook?
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/ebooks/download-reader.asp?PID=28414&cds2Pid=28843&linkid=1509169
Hcobb (talk) 19:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  eReader app 

message: "Although the cafés are owned and operated by Barnes & Noble, servers follow Starbucks' standards in beverage preparation; the prominent Starbucks logo is sometimes confusing for customers wanting to use their Starbucks Stored-Value Cards or Gold Card, which are not accepted (the Barnes & Noble membership card is accepted to receive a discount on any café related goods).[citation needed]"
I didn't write this portion, but aside from the mention of it being "confusing for customers" all of the rest of the statement is factual. If you go to the Barnes & Noble Cafe, they are unable to accept Starbucks Gold Cards or gift cards, and you are able to get the B&N Membership discount in the cafe.  These are facts. Why is a citation needed? Xprivate eyex (talk) 09:35, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the Verifiability and No Original Research policies require it. Nightscream (talk) 18:06, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's right. Verifiability, not truth, is the criterion for inclusion WhisperToMe (talk) 20:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Why does this need a citation?

message: * http://ebm.cheetahmail.com/r/regf2?a=0&aid=266639891&n=100
* http://www.bn.com/borders/
WhisperToMe (talk) 20:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: BN stuff

message: I think it would be a really good stat to add to the page
Theawesome67 (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anyone have any stats on how many books Barnes and Noble have sold? 

message: The article claims based on two newspaper articles (which are probably based on the same press release) that B&N is the last remaining national bookseller. If you look at the page for Books-A-Million, you'll see that it's the second largest bookseller behind B&N. Both of these claims can't be correct. If the claim is based on the word "national" because BAM doesn't sell in all regions, then it comes across more as an advertising/promotional claim than a factual claim.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrSampson (talk • contribs) 16:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last remaining national bookseller 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Barnes & Noble. 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/20130916111734/http://www.businessweek.com:80/news/2013-07-10/bookstores-not-dead-yet-as-riggio-bets-on-barnes-and-noble? to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-07-10/bookstores-not-dead-yet-as-riggio-bets-on-barnes-and-noble
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/about/ny-ihiny021705story,0,5026610.htmlstory
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com/our_company/history/bn_history.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101101215022/http://mainstore.bncollege.com:80/ to http://mainstore.bncollege.com
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Barnes & Noble. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-07-10/bookstores-not-dead-yet-as-riggio-bets-on-barnes-and-noble
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/about/ny-ihiny021705story%2C0%2C5026610.htmlstory
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.06/barnes.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071224133049/http://sec.edgar-online.com/2001/06/18/0000950123-01-503532/Section2.asp to http://sec.edgar-online.com/2001/06/18/0000950123-01-503532/Section2.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://mainstore.bncollege.com/
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) 03:01, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: While the tag was placed back in May, since no discussion was actually opened I figured I'd start the discussion. 
In my opinion, I think a combination split–merge is the best course of action. That is, split the bulk of the B&N Education material out of this article since it is mostly post-spin-off events about a separate company that is no longer part of the company that is the subject of this article. That material should be merged with Barnes & Noble College Booksellers, the article already covering the majority of the history of B&N Ed's main operation. That article should probably then be moved to the Barnes & Noble Education title though it should still mention the "College Booksellers" branding. This article should contain only a short summary section explaining that B&N Ed was once a division of this company but was spun-off, linking to the other article of course. Indeed, looking at it, the decision to cover B&N Ed in this article in the first place was a mistake. oknazevad (talk) 02:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article split 

message: "In September 2022, this store will replace two former Boston-area Amazon Books stores that were closed in March of this year, that will take place in Legacy Place in Dedham and MarketStreet in Lynnfield locations in Boston."
I think that this type of statement should be added on this article. This is because there aren't recent events that are added on this article history section. And there is a chance that a store opened in one of these areas.
But would you tell me reasons why did you remove this part of info on that article?
-- 2601:205:C001:EA0:DD9D:F980:1B2C:6117 (talk) 19:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it is incredibly trivial within the context of the decades-long history of this company. See :WP:UNDUE and WP:RECENTISM for a more detailed explanation. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info Material should be added on this article: 

message: — Assignment last updated by Enelly23 (talk) 14:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: NAS 348 Global Climate Change

message: Since no one else will discuss instead of reverting after being reverted, I'll start the discussion. I think the source is a poor source that doesn't add anything to the article. It's a self-published source, and therefore lacks strong editorial oversight, and is written by the subject's granddaughter, so therefore is of questionable neutrality. And it's not needed to verify the sentence, as the records from Harvard itself are already present. oknazevad (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree - source is nearly 20 years old, provides bland details, and is fairly NPOV. Frankly I wouldn't have found the Harvard source, which I also added if not for the "poor source". Everything I've cross-checked on it checks out. And one has made a claim that any underlying facts are incorrrect. Jjazz76 (talk) 07:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed source