Talk:The Terror (novel)

message: Until secondary sources about this novel appear, there probably shouldn't be an article on it.  This sounds like original research to me, and that is banned from wikipedia.
* There have been dozens of reviews in major newspapers and magazines — secondary sources should not be hard to come by, if you'd like to source the article. --Jere7my (talk) 02:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I find this article terribly disappointing. In the end, what is that Tuunbaq the whole book is talking about? Is it really an element of Inuit mythology as the book seems to suggest? Is it related to Nanook? Or does it come out of Dan Simmons' mind?
I tried to search for more information, but I didn't find anything really interresting.
Thanks, Calimo (talk) 09:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tuunbaq 

message: My father and I read this book a while back, before he passed.  He told me a few times it was based around a real ship.\
I think this article should be intresting:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100729/ap_on_re_ca/cn_canada_franklin_ship_found  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.120.79.186 (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure this is common knowledge. The book is a historical fiction, that is, it's real history that has been fictionalized in it's exact details. The true details surrounding the disappearance of the HMS Terror (1813) and HMS Erebus (1826) are mysterious, but it definitely happened. See: Franklin's lost expedition. Lost Cosmonaut (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: actuality

message: I've removed the statement that the beast in the book is "supernatural". The source cited doesn't seem to work (and I can't independently verify it), and concluding that it is supernatural seems to be speculation. A significant number of reviewers describe it simply as a huge polar bear; lacking a statement by Simmons to the contrary, there doesn't seem to be a reason to assume it is some magical monster. Kafziel Complaint Department 00:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The book definitely has some supernatural elements.  The Tuunbaq is described as a "giant polar bear" but also carries some seemingly supernatural abilities. In the final chapters there are also some supernatural happenings.  The way the book is written, they tend to seem more like the quaint observations of Victorian explorers, ascribing supernatural meanings to natural phenomenon, but on face value they are definitely supernatural in nature.  Lost Cosmonaut (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supernatural? 

message: I've added a Plot Summary and Character list and have edited them today to try to add Real World Context. I apologise if these are not up to the Wikipedia standard, but at least I tried. I think it's better than nothing and would encourage other, more experienced, writers to enhance what I have written.
Cheers
Rich
Richytps (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like you are going somewhere! Way to Be Bold On Wikipedia articles related to fiction need more then just content on plot though. I recommend examining WP:MOS (novels), which will give you an idea on the other parts of the article could use some expansion. The best sources for novels articles are reviews of the novel in newspapers, Sadads (talk) 22:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Added 'Reception' section - I followed your tips Sadads. Hope I did it correctly? What do I need to do to get rid of the annoying 'Mostly Plot Summary' banner at the top of the page? Richytps (talk) 20:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me. The plot section is long, but not inordinately so. Tag removed. Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 22:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for removing the tag, I appreciate it Richytps (talk) 17:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Great work on expanding the article on a good book (those reviewers who said it was too long need to put down their smartphones and learn to appreciate a book that takes its time!). The plot summary seems a little big, should we have every plot development/analysis listed out here?  No complaints, it's well done, but would Richytps be ok with me editing some sections? The Cap'n (talk) 13:27, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Summary and Characters