Talk:Dan Brown/Archive 1

message: I earlier today removed a link to the site bookthoughts.co.nz, as the site appears to be lacking in content, of no particular note (the only link to it google reveals is a link from the owner's own blog), and not specifically relevant to this article.  The link was subsequently reinserted.
Upon further reading, this appears to be one of a number of articles seeing persistent removal and reinsertion of links to the site bookthoughts.co.nz owned by a user formerly registered as Kiwifaramir.  See the user's talk page for discussion on this issue.  Most recent edits inserting links to this site are by users with no contributions or edits aside from the link to bookthoughts inserted with identical text ("Read And Write Reviews On Novels By...") into an article on a given author.  Examples presently include Alice_Sebold, John_Grisham, C._S._Lewis, Martin_Cruz_Smith.  Can any procedurally expert wikipedia users advise on due process in this case? --Yst 03:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Relevance? 

message: For anyone to look up Dan Brown and find minorly relevant details such as lawsuits and plagiarism is a rather unflattering approach to an article worthy of being in Wikipedia. I'd request for a re-write.. if I knew how. Besides, the point of view is seriously not neutral. Sylee 05:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Lawsuits and plagiarism allegations are not minor details, and the article is not supposed to be flattering, but factual. Why not rewrite it yourself? Wikipedia is about being bold! --K. AKA Konrad West TALK 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imitation - best form of flattery 

message: I noticed the reference to a novel called Goya's Gantry (1998) in the article; is this accurate?  I can't find any references to Brown having authored a work with this name (published or otherwise).  Ajnewbold 03:32, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like someone took care of it.  Ajnewbold 12:53, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goya's Gantry? 

message: I have flagged this page as having a non-NPOV as whilst there is criticism of Brown, there is no support. To say that he "has drawn criticism for being wrong" does not explain what the criticism is, and suggests that Brown actually IS wrong. Ukcreation 02:00, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've chopped out the section and put it here.  I encourage whoever put it here to rewrite it with actual sources and specific examples. --CVaneg 08:11, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: The very fact that his books are labled as, and sold as fiction means he has no requirement or burden to be faithful to what some consider to be true history.  On the hardcover edition of "Angels and Demons" the rear dustcover above the ISBN/UPC says "FICTION".  On the publisher page ther is a Fiction disclaimer in reasonably large (but not oversize) letttering.  As a comparison, I pulled a random fiction title off my shelf: Sharpe's tiger" by Bernard Cornwall in paperback format.  It is a fictional title about a recurring character through various REAL naval and land battles between 1799 and 1820.  Nowhere on the rear cover, front cover or spine does it say *FICTION*, nor does it say so on the list of other titles page, the title page, the publisher page, not even a disclaimer, nore does the dedication page, or the inner covers.  Is there some reason Mr. Brown is being held to a higher standard, which is, in my opinion, completely unrealistic?
Most people should be able to realistically deduce from Mr. Brown's "Author's note" page that certain things are real and the rest therefore, is not real.  He makes perfectly acecptable claims to what is real: in his book "Angels and Demons" he states the following as a fact: "the worlds largest scientific research facility-Switzerlands CERN recently succeeded in producing the worlds first particle of antimatter..."  This IS true and is well documented on CERN's website: www.cern.ch.  This is one example of the claims he makes as being fact.  Bearing in mind that his titles are marketed and labled as fiction, Mr. Brown has no obligation to hold anything he writes to events in real history.  Nor does he have an obligation to claim that some things might not be real in big bold lettering.  Yet, on the publisher information page, he does make such a disclaimer.  
Many credible scholars and historians would agree that what is written in many history books is not even faithful to the events which actually transpired.  Sir Winston Churchill is quoted as saying: "History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."  Why then, should Mr. Brown be held to a higher standard than those who write history?
Dan Brown is a well supported and extremely good author. He has many great books under his name and people that think he is a "hack author" should reread his books and think about the facts!
: While you make some good points, Wikipedia is here in this case, I think, to report on the author and widely spread criticisms of the author. They are apparently many and noteworthy, and should not be censored out of hand just because they happen to present him in an unfavorable light. Wesley 6 July 2005 05:36 (UTC)
::It is not the fictional text that everyone disagrees with but misleading introductions making claims about all the places featured being real, when they are changed to fit the story. To use your CERN example he thanks CERN which suggests they in some way helped write the book, which isn't true. And he follows on from your quote with dramatic speculation about anti-matter which isn't factual even in the intro. Then the description of the site inside (not to mention the cringe worthy physics mistakes) is inaccurate. All it would take is to ask a physics undergraduate to read through it! Anyway I think the complaints are that he deliberately uses things like the intro to portray things inside as factual. I am not sure this is a valid criticism as authors in the past (such as Jack Higgins) have portrayed fictional books as fact to good effect. However why not include criticism, it has been widespread so if its properly referenced that is fair if we also include support, but lets be honest the criticism has been more. Plus he writes terrible English I read Angels and Demons cos I work at CERN but it was a real struggle.Jameskeates 10:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beyond the scope and purpose of Wikipedia 

message: I have removed the section on Digital Fortress as it duplicated the criticism section on the page for the book. I have also removed the Angels and demons section, as it was also duplicative.  The criticism for Deception Point was moved from the author page to the book page. I moved the section on the Da Vinci code as well. -- SusanLarson New talk, Contribs)</sup></span> 17:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content changes reguarding criticism section 

message: We need to include some commentary on praise and criticism of Brown within this article, preferably generalised. While book-specific praise/criticisms are better dealt with in any depth within the actual book articles, it would probably be worth summarising them briefly here, particularly for Da Vinci Code. — Matt Crypto 12:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think that's better mentioned on the book pages themselves.  For example, see Angels and Demons, which has a section listing the similarities between books.  Elonka 08:58, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Praise and criticism 

message: An anonymous editor added a claim to the Dan Brown article, saying that though Brown claims to have studied art history for a year in Seville, that the University "has no expedient under his name".  I reverted the comment since it was unreferenced, but it may still be worth following up. I know that it's standard Wikipedia policy to take people's firsthand word for it as to certain biographical details like when they were born, who their parents were, what schools they went to, etc., and it's easily verifiable that Brown *says* that he went to the University of Seville, but if there's a credible claim that this particular datum is false, we should perhaps remove it from the article, or modify the wording to, "Brown claims that he attended..." 
The key, of course, is "credible claim", since there's plenty of garbage that routinely gets added by pranksters.  Considering the Seville issue though, it's true that every source that I can think of, only comes from Brown's interviews.  And he does have a reputation for occasional exaggeration (such as referring to his wife as an "art historian").  Is it possible that this is an exaggeration too, that he just spent a year *in* Seville, but then made the claim that he was "studying at the University" since he could see it from his vantage point at the coffeehouse?  ;)  
I'll recheck my own sources (like Rogak's book), but in the meantime, has anyone else ever seen a verifiable reference besides an interview?  --
Elonka 19:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty good.  My own translation (I lived and worked in South America for over a year) would be:  "This gentleman was never registered at this university, unless he attended a Fall course given to foreign students by the Faculty of Geography and History," and "In a listing of students at the university, there is not a single person by the name of Brown in either the 1994-1995 class year nor the following, although university sources did point out that he could have taken classes 'as an invited student or scholarship recipient.'" I'm a bit fuzzy on the exact meaning of the word "Hispalense" (it may just be the proper name of the university), but I'm pretty confident on the rest. --Elonka 00:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hispalense is a synonim of Sevillano/a, "Sevillian". The roman name of Seville is Hispalis.--Menah the Great 02:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's what I was seeing too.  Okay, so that part would translate to:  "In a listing of Sevillian students, there is not a single person by the name of Brown in either the 1994-1995 class year nor the following, although university sources did point out that he could have taken classes 'as an invited student or scholarship recipient.'" I may still be missing a subtlety, like "invited student" might mean what we refer to as "transfer student" -- we'd need someone more fluent to be certain. --Elonka 03:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  University of Seville 

message: Ese señor nunca ha sido matriculado en esta universidad, a no ser que se apuntara a un curso de otoño de los que se dan en la Facultad de Geografía e Historia” para alumnos extranjeros.
En el listado de alumnos de la Hispalense no aparece ningún Brown ni en el curso 1994-1995 ni en el siguiente, aunque fuentes universitarias consultadas por Efe no descartan que recibiera clases "como estudiante invitado o becario".
Similar sentences can be found in several Spanish websites. Can somebody translate them, please?--Menah the Great 21:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The University of Seville about Dan Brown 

message: I used an online translator, so you will see a very elementary tanslation.  Soemone may want to do a more accurate and complete translation.  here goes...
"That gentleman never been has registered in this university, unless he scored at an autumn course of which they occur in the Faculty of Geography and History "for students extranjeros.[1]En the listing of students of the Hispalense does not appear no Brown neither in course 1994-1995 nor in the following one, although university sources consulted by Efe do not discard that it received classes" like invited student or becario".["
: Pretty good.  My own translation (I lived and worked in South America for over a year) would be:  "This gentleman was never registered at this university, unless he attended a Fall course given to foreign students by the Faculty of Geography and History," and "In a listing of students at the university, there is not a single person by the name of Brown in either the 1994-1995 class year nor the following, although university sources did point out that he could have taken classes 'as an invited student or scholarship recipient.'" I'm a bit fuzzy on the exact meaning of the word "Hispalense" (it may just be the proper name of the university), but I'm pretty confident on the rest. --Elonka 00:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hispalense is a synonim of Sevillano/a, "Sevillian". The roman name of Seville is Hispalis.--Menah the Great 02:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's what I was seeing too.  Okay, so that part would translate to:  "In a listing of Sevillian students, there is not a single person by the name of Brown in either the 1994-1995 class year nor the following, although university sources did point out that he could have taken classes 'as an invited student or scholarship recipient.'" I may still be missing a subtlety, like "invited student" might mean what we refer to as "transfer student" -- we'd need someone more fluent to be certain. --Elonka 03:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reader who is responding to request to translate.

message: I have seen a book by Dan Brown which is not in the "Worsks" section, Illuminati but im not sure if he wrote it or co-wrote it. Someone should check it out and add it in.
212.120.228.189 22:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Works 

message: The article is NPOV, as it makes no mention of the on-going plagiarism trial. We must inform readers that he may not turn out to be a "grail knight". He himself admitted reading the holy grail holy blood book before writing da vinci code. It is also very important, because the holy grail, holy blood authors openly admitted in press that their book was entirely made up, which destroys Dan Brown's claims that everything he wrote is real. 195.70.32.136 14:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find the whole idea of pliagarism nonsense because Dan Brown's book is sold as a novel and the book it was based on was a nonfictional writing. It doesn't really matter, in my opinion, which one is real or both are fictional. Dan Brown's book is a thriller with references to the theories from the other book. In scientific writing this has been done very often. Furthermore, Dan Brown has named a character in reference to the authors of the original book, which can be seen as referencing the original work. But then, we are talking about a novel and fiction remains fiction! But this is just my opinion. --Ghormax 22:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the most appropriate place for the plagiarism accusation, is not on the bio page, but where it's covered now, on the actual book page(s), The Da Vinci Code (under Court Case), and Criticisms of the Da Vinci Code (under Allegations of Plagiarism).  Brown hasn't been attacked about *all* his books, just DVC.  Then again, it might be appropriate to add a "See also" section mentioning it, since it's definitely notable, regardless of whether or not the suit is proven to be with or without merit (and at the moment, it seems to be the latter). But I don't have a strong feeling on it either way, so it depends what the consensus opinion is. If enough people feel we *should* add a section about the trial, then we can do so.  Otherwise, let's leave it off, because we already have enough forks. Anyone else have any thoughts on it? --Elonka 23:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV - put the bloody hand icon into the article! 

message: I added a link to Dan Brown's witness statement from the trial.  It's dozens and dozens of pages long, and there's a lot of info there which we can use to update the related articles.  I'd do it myself, but I'm getting ready to get on a plane and head to GDC, so I won't be doing much editing for the next few days.  I did want to make you all aware of it though!  If no one else has time to get to it, I'll start incorporating the new information when I get back. --Elonka 02:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New reference - Brown's witness statement 

message: Can anyone see a link between the bunfight over 'theft of ideas' (a concept with little legal substance) and the fact that DVC has returned to its number 1 place in the fiction charts for the third year. HBHG has also risen in the nonfiction category. 
Certainly DVC would never have made it based on its literary merits: cardboard characters, sitcom plot, and wooden style. I can't help but admire the publishers' acumen in setting up the legal system this way. Wpenrose 20:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Marketing Tactics 

message: I'm not disputing this claim, just saying that it needs to be cited with a source.  To Google! ````Levid37
: Source is on the page.  Rogak's biography.  --Elonka 18:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really a Christian? 

message: i read somewhere that he was a jew. can anyone confirm it. or were these the allegations against him
nids 19:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure he's not Jewish.  TastyCakes 17:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  isnt he a jew 

message: A user keeps to tell this man to shut the hell up becuase willie is being all gay with the sources but it is unreliable. I do not see any proof that this is unreliable, it is not character defamation
since Dan Brown's claim remains unverified, and this may relate to his depiction in Digital Fortress of Spain
as a third world country. I am putting it back in.
From that user:  I have no problem with a lot of the criticisms of Dan Brown.  However, I can state categorically that Dan Brown was at the University of Sevilla because I was in the class with him.   I will simply not let the Wikipedia page stand saying he wasn't.
:Is there some reason we should not believe what is said in the cited source? Quadpus 03:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's pretty clear he has a habit of deliberately misleading people in order to sell books. Just look at the quotes in The Da Vinci Code#Literary and historical criticism.Quadpus 12:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed Claims 

message: Until someone sources this claim that he has outines for at least 12 future books, I've changed it to "several." Softlavender 03:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it's sourced to an interview with Brown, in Dan Burstein's "Secrets of the Code."  I'll see if I can dig up a more precise reference. --Elonka 16:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here's an online source. --Elonka 20:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "12 future books"? 

message: Dan Brown's claim calling "himself a Christian who says the controversy is good to inspire 'discussion and debate' that will ultimately lead to a more solidly defended faith" is transparent hyperbole - the research for both Angels and Demons and Da Vinci Code represented uncritical acceptance of the pseudo-historical books found in the Mind, Body and Spirit departments in bookshops and Libraries (also designated as New Age) and nothing to do with respectable bonafide history. Let's see Dan Brown engage in an open debate with informed individuals rather than on a one-to-one basis with interviewers who are there to wrap him in cotton wool. He's never done this.  Dan Brown has done the same mix-up with the "Priory of Sion" in Da Vinci Code like he did with the "Illuminati" in Angels and Demons. Wfgh66 19:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you read the article Fiction Nil Einne (talk) 10:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transparent Hyperbole 

message: Does this even make sense to anyone else? If it is actual information, it might be better suited to The Da Vinci Code, which I think it's referring to.Epmatsw (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Author is not copyright holder for sword and chalice 

message: I'd say if we are going to mention him and the outcome of the plagiarism trial, it makes sense to complete the story by mentioning his death. What do others think? --John (talk) 22:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if his death is relevant to that trial. Nightscream (talk) 03:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Richard Leigh (author)|Richard Leigh]] 

message: A couple of years ago, there was a section in the Angels & Demons article listing reused plot devices in all of Dan Brown's novels( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Angels_%26_Demons&oldid=66454116#Similarities_to_Brown.27s_other_books ). A while later, it was moved to another page, which was deleted. Is there any way to add that information to this page? Llxwarbirdxll (talk) 20:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added passages about recurring motifs in his novels to the article in late September. Nightscream (talk) 04:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarities between his books 

message: This is what this interview says, he lived for a year, 17 or 18 years old, in the city of Gijon, in Spain: http://www.lne.es/ultima/2009/10/29/dan-brown-escancio-sidra/827208.html  (sorry, it is only in Spanish)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.128.4.223 (talk) 08:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  He lived in Spain in 1979 

message: There is no reference in the article to the "Bernini Mystery", sometimes seen as title of one of his books. Can someone add this? Is it an additional book or an alias of one? −Woodstone (talk) 10:11, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now added several backtranslated titles of the works. Especially confusing is the official Dan Brown website, which shows the cover of Dutch "Het Bernini Mysterie" as translation of Deception Point, whereas it really is a translation of Angels and Demons. −Woodstone (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

text: The website cited above (here) of the USA publisher shows as translation of "Angels and Demons" both "Het Bernini Mysterie" as well as "De Delta Deceptie". The former is actually a translation of "Angels and Demons". Wouldn't you call that confusion? Why your anger in suppressing the given useful additional information? I don't get it. Give some room for other opinions than yours. −Woodstone (talk) 09:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:AGF. You have not established any "anger" on my part, any more than you've established "confusion" on the part of international readers, who, if they don't read English, aren't really going to be reading the English language versions of the novels. The fact that Dan Brown's website is confusing to you does not mean it bears any relevance to his Wikipedia article. This is not a question of "suppression" of information, or not giving room for other opinions; I simply disagree with yours, and have provided the reasoning for why I do so: English readers read the English language versions of his novels, whereas those who read other languages will read those versions. If you can refute this reasoning, and/or provide evidence that such readers are indeed "confused", then please provide a source for that. Nightscream (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There are many people (me included) who read literature in a mix of languages. Whichever suitable edition comes one's way first. If the titles are not literal translations, it becomes then difficult to find out how complete one's reading has become. It is natural to go check the WP in the original language for the complete list and scratch off the ones read. This is greatly enhanced by my additions to the article. Space is cheap in wikipedia. I simply cannot understand what your reasonable objection could be against this enhancement. If you don't want to know this information, skip it when reading. Others will read it thankfully. And Dan Brown's site it not just confusing, it is confused (plain wrong). −Woodstone (talk) 15:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I have corrected the placement and added a reference for the "Illuminati" title to be at "Angels and Demons". You are right that this information would also be useful at the various book-articles. I have not done that yet but  that is not an argument relating to this article. Also the incompleteness of my additions is not a sound argument. The whole voluntary and cooperative nature of WP allows each editor to add their bits and pieces of information as they see fit. The main point: why here, at this article, I have explained above. A reader would like to check which books are missing from his reading list. He may have read several books in different languages and now wishes to establish which books are left to be read. Checking against the contended list will keep him from inadvertently bying a new book that he has already read in another language under a different title. That could not be done by checking the book articles, because he would not know some of the English titles. One reason I have backtranslated the titles is (yes, indeed) this is the English WP, and secondly this limits the alternatives, since that way there is no need to add a long list of minor (spelling) variants. −Woodstone (talk) 05:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the list with original plus alternative titles that supplies most added value. −Woodstone (talk) 06:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: If you aim at completeness, go right ahead. Each addition makes the list more useful. I did not add all because I do not know all languages. Let editors knowing those langages make more additions. −Woodstone (talk) 06:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: So why have Wikipedia at all? All the information is out there. Let people fend for themselves. (I always thought WP was there to present collected information in an accessible form.) −Woodstone (talk) 06:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: In principle yes, I would support that, preferably by giving backtranslated forms. That keeps the list concise. −Woodstone (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: In this volunteering cooperative environment of WP there is no requirement of completenes by every single editor. I added information about languages I'm familiar with. Hopefully other people can make additions for their languages. &minusWoodstone (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: You don't get it. Your procedure for the hypothetical reader does not work. He has read "Het Bernini Mysterie".  He goes to WP and looks up "The Bernini Mystery". Not found. End of procedure. Or does he now have to go to the Dutch WP and hope the book is there? What if he does not remember in what language he read the book? I usually do not. You make it a complex search. −Woodstone (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: It can hardly be called indiscriminate additions. They fiot perfectly in the already present list and are a perfect way for readers to find out which books of the author are still left to be read. Any article on only one of the books does not offer this facility. At the very least the reader would have to go to all the book artciles  with pen and paper in hand to make the list himself. Let's do that work for him in WP. −Woodstone (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Precisely. Contrary to the low opinion that Woodstone seems to have of every other foreign language user of WP, going to WP and not finding the "The Bernini Mystery" is not the "end of the procedure". If the reader is intelligent, and not hampered by a defeatist attitude or sheer laziness, then he/she can investigate ways to find out other versions of that title, or articles on it, much as I did when creating that list in the A&D article. Using redirects is one way to aid them. Pretending that they're so incompetent that they suddenly have to use "pen and paper", as Woodstone theorizes, even though they're already on a computer, is not realistic, and reveals an inability on his part to consider that he might be wrong. I'm removing that information, and adding it to the other articles, along with redirects. Thank you for your participation, Mildly Mad. :-) Nightscream (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bernini mystery 

message: Hi there, I found this dispute on WP:3O.  I'll do my best to provide a neutral opinion.  As stated by User:Nightscream, this article should only include the as-written titles of the novels; such a list would quickly get out of hand--see WP:TOPIC.  (As a precedent, J. K. Rowling#Publications only lists "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone," despite being popular in the United States as "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.")  Such information might be included at an article such as "List of novels by Dan Brown" or "Translations of Dan Brown novels," and definitely in each novel's individual article, but not here.  Instead, to aid multilingual readers in finding the novel that they are reading (if they do not want to go to the appropriate non-English Wikipedia), one might, for example, create a redirect from The Bernini Mystery to Angels & Demons. Mildly MadTC 16:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely. Contrary to the low opinion that Woodstone seems to have of every other foreign language user of WP, going to WP and not finding the "The Bernini Mystery" is not the "end of the procedure". If the reader is intelligent, and not hampered by a defeatist attitude or sheer laziness, then he/she can investigate ways to find out other versions of that title, or articles on it, much as I did when creating that list in the A&D article. Using redirects is one way to aid them. Pretending that they're so incompetent that they suddenly have to use "pen and paper", as Woodstone theorizes, even though they're already on a computer, is not realistic, and reveals an inability on his part to consider that he might be wrong. I'm removing that information, and adding it to the other articles, along with redirects. Thank you for your participation, Mildly Mad. :-) Nightscream (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Third Opinion

message: Having just watched the film, was Dan Brown in the film possibly playing the role of the COE of PointCorp at the Senate hearings, a Dan Brown was named in the credits at the end?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frannyb1956 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  State of Play - Film version. 

message: It's been said that per WP:CRITS, criticism sections should be integrated into the article. Do you think that is meant for just politicans and would authors be different given that it's more likely that their criticism sections are more literary in nature as opposed to political criticism? If the two types of criticism  sections (in my opinion) are not different in nature, then we should really start to integrate the criticism into the article itself. Just putting it out there for discussion.--RossF18 (talk) 20:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section integration 

message: We say he studied at Amherst and that he was "a writing student". It would be clearer if we were explicit about what his major was (presumably Eng.Lit or Creative Writing). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 22:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We'd need a source for that, per WP:NOR/WP:V. Nightscream (talk) 23:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ...which is why I'm asking.  If I had a source, I'd have made the change already. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 02:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry. A lot of people (newbies, I guess) post on Talk Pages to ask about adding this or that, and have to be told about those policies. Mea culpa. Nightscream (talk) 04:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major 

message: The influences section lists both Shakespeare and Leonardo, which is both silly and unsourced. As someone with a reasonable knowledge on both, I am a little surprised that anyone could think that Brown displays any affinity with either writer. I'm going to go ahead and remove this. Elphit (talk) 19:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: With respect to Shakespeare, it is neither silly nor unsourced, as it is sourced in the Influences and habits section. Whether one is influenced or has an infinity for a particular person has no bearing on whether an editor feels that it is displayed, since that is subjective, and POV. The Leonardo influence, however, is indeed unsourced (as is the notion that he influenced Harlan Coben, since Coben influenced Brown), so I removed that. Nightscream (talk) 20:34, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influences 

message: "Storie" ...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.253.236.228 (talk) 13:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typos in the article 

message: This article has no direct link to the Wikipedia article The Da Vinci Code (film) !  This omission appears to be either a ridiculous oversight or a blatant attempt to manipulate public opinion.  The article does have a link to the "sequel" movie, Angels & Demons (film). I would correct this myself, but the Edit tab has been removed from the page. Correction: There is a link to the film buried in the list of miscellaneous links at the end of the article.    There should be a link within the body of the article, just as there is with Angels & Demons.  71.174.155.85 (talk) 16:29, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is most certainly a link for it in the Film adaptations section. Nightscream (talk) 06:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  No link in article to The Da Vinci Code (film)?! 

message: 'Nightscream' has deleted the notice I posted earlier: 
"Not to be confused with Dale Brown, the (other) author."
I disagree with his justification.  Dan and Dale are FAR to easy to confuse or mis-remember with one another.
LP-mn (talk) 00:38, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not to be confused with Dale Brown, the (other) author. 

message: Dear Editor, Could you please add the following updated information to the Philanthropy section of Dan Brown's Wikipedia page:  Thank you.
In April of 2011, Brown made a gift to his alma mater, Amherst College, to create an endowed scholarship fund for incoming writing students. 
Ref: www.amherst.edu
Founded in 2007, The Dan & Blythe Brown Foundation continues to underwrite a wide variety of charities, focusing primarily on education and environmental issues. Ref: www.nhcf.org Sarahmont (talk) 13:16, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of the two references you provided support the material you describe. They're just the main pages of two websites, neither of which makes any mention of Brown's gift or his Foundation. Sources must explicitly establish the material in question. If there are pages on that site that do support that material, and you can provide the urls for those pages, we can add the material then. Thanks. :-) Nightscream (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Sarahmont, 22 June 2011 

message: Any discussion anywhere about Dan Brown and his relationship with his own father? He has written five books already, and in EVERY book of his there must be certain characters with serious conflicts with their fathers. Every one of them without exception. Has he consciously or unconsciously reflected an Oedipus complex in his works? I am asking this in good faith, with no ill intention to Mr. Brown himself, but the fact about his created characters is so obvious that I just wonder - and wonder who else might wonder like me? 114.199.99.191 (talk) 10:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH and WP:V. Nightscream (talk) 20:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dan Brown and Oedipus complex 

message: I'm reading in several places that Dan Brown is the author behind the Nikki Heat series of books relating to the ABC Television show Castle.  Here and on Goodreads.com.  Is this worth noting?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderfullyrich (talk • contribs) 03:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard Castle books 

message: I will be adding it under film adoptions. please review the edit and remove it not appropriate as its not released yet.. Tho its confirmed to be released in 2012.
Hashan 22:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  No link to The Lost Symbol (Film) 

message: In the "Works by Dan Brown" section, I noticed a novel, "Karma", which is proudly sitting there. However, it was written by another Dan Brown, not by the same Dan Brown who wrote Angels and Demons.
A link which you might find useful in order to check the authenticity of the "Karma" novel here on Amazon  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksiiitm (talk • contribs) 14:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Karma" is by another Dan Brown 

message: My friend is called Dan Brown. This is not him.
2.126.84.168 (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh right. Thanks for the info--Jac16888 Talk 12:09, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 17 May 2012 

message: Currently the article states that: "A film adaptation of The Lost Symbol is confirmed to be in production for 2012 release." However, both references given are three years old. Almost three quarters of the year 2012 have passed with no sign of the movie going into production. The article on the movie says: "So far, there has been no sign of the movie going into production." So I suggest that we remove the mention of a 2012 release unless a source from this year is provided. --89.27.36.41 (talk) 10:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 13:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film adaptation of ''The Lost Symbol'' 

message: Substituted at 14:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The article states that he is born on the 22. June while the info box on the right side says he is born on the 22. July. Im not sure which one is right, if anyone knows, please fix it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.166.176.201 (talk) 16:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth date? 

message: Please add under Philanthropy:  Partnering with the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation, Brown and his wife established the Dan & Blythe Brown Foundation, which provides ongoing funding to charities nationwide in support of various causes aligned with its philanthropical priorities. 
http://www.nhcf.org/document.doc?id=236   page 14, donors
Sarahmont (talk) 15:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: . Once you are confirmed you should be able to expand the article yourself.--Canoe1967 (talk) 06:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

text: I apologize if my above post seemed harsh. An editor asked for assistance at help desk to clear the back log. I was just helping out in good faith. These pages are protected for various reasons. I found that many requests didn't need a template, but just a regular talk page request or IPs creating accounts and/or users waiting the 4 days and ten edits to do it themselves.--Canoe1967 (talk) 07:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

text: Done. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 17:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 18 July 2012 

message: I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but when one clicks on "Inferno" under the 'notable works' section, it links to a general "inferno" page, not to the book's page.  i would edit it myself, but im not exactly sure how to edit that particular section...  if someone wants to edit it, the following is the correct page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferno_%28Dan_Brown_novel%29 
if someone wants to just tell me how to do it, i can after work tonight. Osmo250 (talk) 01:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: , TNKS to someone — Do a 'find' on [Inferno] and see that all four refs link to proper WP page. 
* PS: When you want to see good Wikipedia writing techniques, briefly go into 'edit' on a good WP page. 
* Notice the use of bolding for the Inferno novel title. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 10:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inferno 

message: Considering the fact that Brown is well known for making things up out of whole cloth with absolutely no basis in actual fact, perhaps the part about the 'research-intensive nature' of his writing should be...reworked. 94.255.173.237 (talk) 10:24, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Just because, as a novelist, he invents/twists "facts" to suit his book does not in any way negate the research he does do, which is arguably  intensive. If the article made a judgement call on the quality of his research (i.e. it was always accurate) or use of that research (i.e. he never strays from the sources) then that could be changed. But the intensity of his research, as it relates to how long it takes him to write his books (which is what the rest of the sentence says "Because of the research-intensive nature of his novels, Brown can spend up to two years writing them."), is accurate as it stands. Although finding an RS to back up that particular claim would be advisable. Vyselink (talk) 15:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As the man claims that 99% of his books, beyond the obviously invented characters, are true, and there is LARGE amounts of rebuttal to this, I'd say that while it may be intensive, calling it research is nonsense. He makes up things out of whole cloth. His WORK may be intensive, but if it isn't factual, it isn't research.85.229.59.77 (talk) 22:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

text: If I spend two years, purportedly doing research, and makes the number of severe errors that Brown has done, have I actually done any research? Or have I merely goofed off at spectacular levels for two years? His books are all full of the sort of brain-melting errors that the most basic of studying should have avoided.85.229.59.77 (talk) 20:13, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research 

message: Hi, I'm a fairly new editor and am not sure how to properly flag an article for attention, but I see some issues with this page. Several articles of intentional slander seem to be inserted, such as "of no talent," stating that he won the "Most annoying smoker of the year award, 2015" and referring to him as "Danielle" Brown. It seems that this whole article probably needs to be examined for bias and slanderous insertions.  Hoff0839 (talk) 17:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit for bias 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dan Brown. 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/20090524011135/http://www.thestandard.com.hk:80/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=18&art_id=14142&sid=7052348&con_type=1 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=18&art_id=14142&sid=7052348&con_type=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090526010819/http://www.vision.org:80/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=1333 to http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=1333
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) 16:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There was a a comment about Jack Dunn added on Apr 1 with no citation and seems potentially libelous. Should it be removed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkhwaja (talk • contribs) 07:21, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove libelous comment about Jack Dunn?  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dan Brown. 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.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=18&art_id=14142&sid=7052348&con_type=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090523225741/http://phillips.exeter.edu/ei/news/news_danbrown.html to http://phillips.exeter.edu/ei/news/news_danbrown.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=1333
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) 18:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified