Talk:Rob Roy (novel)

message: Someone has upped the assessment - however for a Novel of this stature this is a pitiful article. Not that what is here is bad just insufficient. I badly needs more work, in almost all respects. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a stub, though. Deb (talk) 20:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessed

message: I object. Please cite your claims (with reliable sources) or they will be deleted. Ingram 19:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Which part are you talking about?  I think the background section has some rather strange and off-the-point sentences.  Are you objecting to the way I rewrote part of the lede?  Nathan43 (talk) 16:39, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can tell your work is superb. Keep up the good work! My objection is strictly with the "Background" section which (to me at least) is an object lesson in POV editing. Ingram 22:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Tendentious editing|Axe grinding]] in 'Background' section 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Dalziel Brothers - Sir Walter Scott - Rob Roy in the Crypt of Glasgow Cathedral.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 10, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-12-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng  {chat} 18:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Dalziel Brothers - Sir Walter Scott - Rob Roy in the Crypt of Glasgow Cathedral.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: I very much doubt that Scott's novel was the source for these movies. I have seen the one with Neelson, and it lacks all the main characters and plot points. The disney film also lacks the central characters from the novel. 98.206.155.53 (talk) 06:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  At first I was surprised by your comment, but after a little reflection I agree with you completely.  I read the book and saw the movie shortly afterwards and I was so disappointed!  But the people who made the movie had every right to make their own version, after all.  There were some similar events from what I remember, but mostly it's a very different plot.  For one example, Rob Roy's wife is so different!  Many of the scenes in the book just don't occur, and the whole section that is set in England is absent -- and that comprises a good deal of the first part of the novel. Nathan43 (talk) 16:07, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can see Rob Roy himself is the only character who appears in both the book and the film: Rob Roy's wife in the book is a different character with a different name. Tigerboy1966  22:41, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  source for movies 

message: I'm learning.  Just wanted to say this novel deserves a better Wikipedia entry.
To that end I wrote what I consider an overly long and detailed plot precis.
I also yanked out the Cast of Characters that I wrote some time ago, which I intend to replace with a better one.
Later, I hope to add hyperlinks from the plot precis to the new cast of characters.
I would also like to add a section which fleshes out the background cultural and historical references which the novel brushes over:
:* Growing popularity of coffee/literary shops (coffee from growing trade with the West Indies and Americas)
:* Rise of mercantile houses in "the City"
:* "Old Cavaliers never die, they retire to their country estates" :)
:* Duelling amongst the gentry
:* The sporting country life of the gentry
:* Foodpads and highwaymen
:* [Border-]Reiving a.k.a. "the cattle trade" - Reivers involved in some of the Scots vs. English battles, often switching sides midway
:* Catholicism vs. Protestantism (Jacobitism vs. "King Billy")
I would welcome any comments or advice.
Grunter Grimm (talk) 02:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello, New Edits 

message: The Plot summary section contains 2,068 words – where a maximum 700 words is recommended. This is followed by an entirely unnecessary and duplicative Chapter summary section containing 1,439 words. The total is 3,507 words which is more than  the length of George Orwell's novel, Animal Farm.
The Chapter summary section should be removed and the Plot summary should have about 90% of its content deleted. O'Dea (talk) 19:42, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than laboriously edit out 90% of the Plot summary section, I  took the short cut and simply restored the plot summary that existed on March 1, 2012 before the thousands of words were added on March 22nd. I also removed the redundant Chapter summary section. O'Dea (talk) 20:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I note belatedly that editor Grunter Grimm, above, noted in 2012 that "I wrote what I consider an overly long and detailed plot precis." I agree with his self assessment and the problem is now corrected. O'Dea (talk) 20:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grossly long plot 

message: I notice that the character of the Duke is described as "unidentified in the novel" in this page. 
It seems pretty clear he is meant to be Rob Roy's real-life, onetime patron and later enemy, James Grahame, first Duke of Montrose. The enmity between the two is one of the best known features of the real Rob Roy's life story, with lawsuits between them and Rob Roy engaging in terror and kidnapping against Montrose. In the novel, when they meet in chapter 6 (13 in the Gutenberg version), it is clear there is a long history of animosity between them, and when the Duke tells Rob Roy it is his own fault he has so many enemies, Rob Roy replies  “Had I called myself Grahame, instead of Campbell, I might have heard less about them.” At some point I did edit this into the article but I think it got lost in a purge. Cooker (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Duke