Talk:Nora Roberts

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 18:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Unless anyone objects in this space in the next day or so, I'd like to re-arrange this listing of books to alphabetical rather than chronological. I think that anyone looking for a particular novel would do so by the title, particularly since NR is so amazingly prolific. Estreya 19:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For Nora Roberts books, the die hard fans seem to know the chronological order more so than the alphabetical order, but eh. As for the list, given the fact that she has in fact published over a hundred novels I think it's a bit ridiculous to have every novel she's written on here anyway, but that's just me. --ImmortalGoddezz 21:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, it is quite a long list of books, but the precedence is there to keep them in the bio: see Stephen_king or James_Michener.  Of course both of those entries use a different method for listing books -- one chronological and one alphabetical! The book I'm taking info from in my research lists them alphabetical.  Maybe I'll take a look around and see if I can find a consensus on Wikipedia. Estreya 00:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change Proposed to Book Listing 

message: The statement that "twenty-nine [Roberts] debuted in the number-one spot" and the supporting document ("Roberts Fun Facts") are somewhat misleading and perhaps contrived. Only 9 Roberts books and 3 Robb books were Hardcover Times number one bestsellers, and these were for a total of 16 weeks, which compares to John Grisham's 21 #1 hardcovers for 118 weeks. I have been keeping a list of these for many, many years, and that is it. I don't know what the story is with paperbacks, ebooks, books on tape, and so on, but as far as I am concerned, only the hardcover #1 really counts.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.168.22 (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: According to her website: "There are more than 280 million copies of Nora Roberts books in print (as of 12/31/04). Over the last 23 years, an average of 23 Nora Roberts books were sold every minute. There are enough Nora Roberts books in print to fill the seats of Giants Stadium nearly 4 thousand times. If you place all Nora’s books top to bottom, they would stretch across the United States from Los Angeles to New York City nearly 11 times. In the time you take to read this section, another 23 Nora Roberts books were sold." Estreya 17:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Book sales

message: Who are these "scholars of romance fiction" and what are their studies?  Could we have some footnotes?  I would otherwise suggest deleting this part of the sentence for lack of support.
--KCargill 01:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it is a weak sentence. She has long blended her "romance fiction" with murder, mystery, magic or fantasy. That should be expanded upon. I'd also like to see something added about her successful 1997 plagiarism suit against Janet Dailey. I'll try to get around to it soon! Estreya 19:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That whole sentence needs to be deleted. Without references it's POV. Additionally something needs to be added about Lifetime collaborating with NR on 4 book to television movies, not to mention the fact that Sanctuary is already a movie imbd (which Lifetime has aquired). --ImmortalGoddezz 15:24, 1 September 2006 (UTR
Regarding her book sales. Forbes did an article on her in 2005. She is the highest paid author in America with 60 milllion in book sales and the second highest in the world behind J.K. Rowling who as of 2005, had pulled in $129 million - according to the article. Candyapplered 21:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Romance Scholars"

message: I'm not sure how Irish Nora Roberts is. Her birth name was Robertson, which is Lowland Scots, and there are no Robertsons in the telephone directory for my part of Ireland. This includes Ardmore, on which she based three books, and which "American tourists flock to visit". But, to quote the Irish Times, "if you ask anyone in Ireland outside Ardmore about Nora Roberts, the answer is, inevitably, 'Nora who?'". Millbanks 08:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have told you before, talk pages are about the articles themselves. Whatever personal opinions you may have don't belong on the talk pages. Please don't make this another issue like you did on Plastic Paddy. IrishGuy talk 07:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish? 

message: Naming conventions say that basically this page should be at the most commonly identified name for this person (aka Nora Roberts) and not Elanor Marie Robertson. The move should not have been done without some kind of discussion on the talk page in the first place in any case to see if it was a disputed move. Since this has not happened, and since naming conventions are not being followed what I want to do is move the page back to Nora Roberts, but I want to make sure there are no disputes to that, if there are address them here. Anyway I'll start the 'move the page' process in seven days if there are no complaints within that time period.--ImmortalGoddezz 22:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there has been concern from User:E-romance that the name chance is unnecessary I'm going to start a WP:Requested moves. --ImmortalGoddezz 23:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: I didn't request that the works be moved to a new article, but I'd like to endorse that.  Her booklist is so long and continues to grow.  It deserves it's own article. If you have objections, please say so here.  I'll wait about a week and then move them if there are no objections. Karanacs 03:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When I created the list of Nora's books, I based it on other author pages I found on WP. I support your request to move as I see more authors are having their works listed as separate articles. My only fear is that someday the pendulum will swing the other way and someone will say all "Works of ... " articles are "lists" and don't belong on WP. It took me several weeks to compile and format the list (it has since been changed slightly, not by me) and I personally use it often. I really don't want to see all that work and utility go down the drain!  Estreya 22:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move works to new article

message: On 18 November 2007 IP editor 138.210.248.21 added a spurious Quill 2005 Romance award for Midnight Bayou; unfortunately this information was incorrect, the Quill 2005 Romance award went to 44 Cranberry Point by Debbie Macomber.  Please see the Official Quill Awars webpage]. --Bejnar (talk) 18:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quill awards

message: The article cites the settlement of the plagiarism lawsuit to ("Nora Roberts: A Celebration of Emotions", Publishers Weekly, http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA165397.html?pubdate=2%2F23%2F1998&display=archive, retrieved on 25 December 2006). However that article, in discussing the suit, says "As of press time, Roberts was in the pretrial discovery phase of the lawsuit she has filed against Dailey." Obviously it is not a source for the outcome of the suit. Another cited source  ("Romance novelist Janet Dailey apologizes for plagiarizing", The Shawnee News-Star, http://www.news-star.com/stories/073097/life1.html, retrieved on 9 August 2007) is no longer available at the link given. We need some sources on the outcome of the plagiarism suit. I have no reason to doubt that the statements are accurate, but this is a BLP issue. Stating that Dailey admitted wrongdoing and settled the suit is surely a possibly negative statement, and needs some sourcing. 205.210.232.62 (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My edits were undone in bulk, with no comment here. An additional cite was provided to supplement the citation no longer online (although presumably still valid). But neither that new source ("Romance Writer Janet Dailey Sued", New York Daily News, http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/1997/08/27/1997-08-27_romance_writer_janet_dailey_.html) nor the previously existing cited source (("Nora Roberts: A Celebration of Emotions" supports the statement "In a settlement, Dailey paid Roberts an undisclosed sum, which Roberts donated to the Literacy Volunteers of America." Both of these sources were published while the suit was still in progress, and so they cannot possibly support a statement about the settlement. Also neither of them support "Both of those novels were pulled from print after Dailey's admission." neither mentions any admission by Dailey, nor any pulling of any work from print. Presumably these are sourced to the now offline Shawnee News-Star article. 205.210.232.62 (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

text: All of this information is widely known in the romance novel world; citations are easy to find if one looks.  I've recited most of this for now. Karanacs (talk) 19:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, but "widely known" is not the same as sourced. Now it is significantly better sourced. Thank you for adding a useful cite. 205.210.232.62 (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation problems

message: In the opening paragraph, "by error some of her works were published in the UK as Sarah Hardesty" (Sarah Hardesty, btw, circularly links right back to this page). Later, under 'other pseudonyms', we read "Roberts has also been known as Sara Hardesty". The sentences appear to be contradictory.Irish Melkite (talk) 06:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which is it? 

message: I reworked the LMT section to be less gushy and gossipy, but I question whether this section should be included at all.
--UnicornTapestry (talk) 16:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lifetime movie channel 

message: Okay, so she wrote a book which turned into a telemovie which stars some actor who says she starred in a movie called Northern Lights based on the Nora Roberts book of the same name but it instead redirects to the Philip Pullman HDM book which is obviously not written by NORA ROBERTS! Please explain to me. Kausill 06:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Now fixed. Felix116 (talk) 20:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Lights? 

message: I removed the two uncited claims that the pseudonym "Sarah Hardesty" was an "error". A news article notes that this is not correct and gives a URL to a message board where an apparent explanation is offered by Roberts herself (). These claims seem certainly strong enough to warant a removal of the "in error" claim. 142.177.25.37 (talk) 14:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sarah Hardesty "error" 

message: The article states that she's "the youngest of five baby squids."  There's a citation that no longer is active.  Further, it states that she met her second husband "to take care of her baby squids."
Is this someone messing with the page or something personal about Ms. Roberts that I'm unfamiliar with (and I don't know about her at all)?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanEisen (talk • contribs) 19:07, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Squids 

message: There is a small plain list of books under Nora_Roberts#Books then 2 headings below is a link to Nora Roberts bibliography.  
Are these books the plagiarised ones? The most best sellers? Does the Books heading belong under Works ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.51.147.76 (talk) 06:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A list of Books  

message: I love every single book of yours that I have read. My grandson made a bookmark, out of a popsicle stick, colored it, and wrote your name on it.  Gave it to me for christmas. 2605:4A80:A700:F160:696B:5EBD:45D2:15E0 (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Your writing style