Talk:The Big Four (novel)

message: :Image:The Big Four First Edition Cover 1927.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 18:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The Big Four First Edition Cover 1927.jpg

message: Edited. I have yet to complete it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.165.246 (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are there citations in the Plot summary? They seem unnecessary, especially with a section of Analysis of the plot and the character descriptions being cited to two authors other than Christie. Does anyone see that there is analysis in the Plot summary, to be removed along with the citations?   --Prairieplant (talk) 14:13, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary 

message: The third paragraph from the beginning features three major spoilers:
The book also features Achille Poirot, Hercule's twin brother (later revealed to be Hercule Poirot himself in 'disguise', though this is debated by readers) and Countess Vera Rossakoff, an agent of the Big Four that Poirot has met back when she was a jewel thief. It is implied that the Countess is Poirot's love interest, or at least something so close to that that it makes no difference.
First the revelation of Achille, then his real identity, and also the appearance of Countess Vera. Surely this paragraph is unnecessary? SplinterCell37 (talk) 13:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read Wikipedia:Spoiler. The comment should remain somewhere on the page however the spoiler section just referred to does advise that items should be in sections marked "plot" or somesuch. Unfortunately the plot section on this page is not yet complete.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 15:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that shortening the existing paragraphs in the plot would be a good idea. It wouldn't leave as much detail to be required for the unfinished sections. This is because there are many of subplots to be considered. For example, I think not every attempt on Poirot's life should be mentioned ie the falling tree.--Adrenalin 150% (talk) 02:08, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoilers 

message: In my copy of The Big Four there's no "Meyerling", but "Mayerling". Should I change it? Johnnyjanko (talk) 13:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly  be bold and make the change. You have the source in front of you.  --Prairieplant (talk) 19:03, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Changed. My edition is this one: 1965, Fontana Books (Imprint of HarperCollins), paperback, 159 pp (Johnnyjanko (talk) 09:39, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meyerling or Mayerling? 

message: The original twelve stories have been reprinted in their original form in 2016: The Big Four, A Detective Story Club Classic Crime Novel (Harper Collins)
http://www.harpercollins.com.au/9780008165000/#sm.00001luqhn2eqmfl4qhm3qzq0mf69
Should this publication be integrated in this page or should it be a new page? Because it is a short story collection I think it will be better to create a new page. 
Pitchshifter (talk) 05:02, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This edition could be discussed under Development of the novel from short stories, a section already existing in this article. The short stories are named and numbered for both UK and USA publication, and there is the same explanation of the pressure on Christie to produce another novel after the success of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd that appears at the link you provided. My suggestion is to add this citation in that section, a re-issue of the short stories. --Prairieplant (talk) 09:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novel vs Short Story Collection 

message: : This edition could be discussed under Development of the novel from short stories, a section already existing in this article. The short stories are named and numbered for both UK and USA publication, and there is the same explanation of the pressure on Christie to produce another novel after the success of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd that appears at the link you provided. My suggestion is to add this citation in that section, a re-issue of the short stories. --Prairieplant (talk) 09:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Pitchshifter reference

message: I see that the original stories were given separate titles - should we have a list of them ?
When it says there were only 11 stories in the US, does that mean that one story wasn't published there ? Or that two of the UK story were published as one in the US ? -- Beardo (talk) 18:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that it was the latter. -- Beardo (talk) 01:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The original stories 

message: She's clearly based on Marie Curie (as would have been obvious to readers in 1927)... AnonMoos (talk) 23:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Madame Olivier