Talk:Nelson DeMille

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

Contents 1 End of book discussion in beginning synopsis - spoilers? 2 Tone 3 The General's Daughter 4 editorializing/extrapolating/opinion

[edit] End of book discussion in beginning synopsis - spoilers?

I feel, that talking about his writing style in regards to his endings is fine.

However, mentioning a specific book (Night Fall in this example) and giving some clues about the ending is a spoiler in a sense. At least some sort of warning should be given. I'm in the middle of actually reading this book, and saw that note, which irked me.

[edit] Tone

The statement about DeMille's attitude toward Christians is worded poorly. It sounds unencyclopedic. I'm going to edit it if nobody else does. Jiggz84 04:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Having read the book in question I think that having evangelical christians as the villians would have made more sense - I think that he may have taken that element out at a late point. It seems to me that, if the comment can be researched correctly, it deserves inclusion in the entry for the book itself (since it impacted the books content) rather than on the author's page. Either way I agree that having this in the entry appears very 'unencyclopedic' and the entry clearly implies that any anti-christian thought is a "curious state of mind" - obviously more opinion than anything else. --Ericpol 20:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the section in question--Ericpol 19:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The General's Daughter

I removed the link from the book title. The link takes you to the movie page, as there is no page for the book. And there is already a movie link included in the list. Itsmeiam 17:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] editorializing/extrapolating/opinion

I removed the following:

"Another characteristic of the most recent novels is the recurrence of the main character, John Corey. Here, under the secure cover of a more renegade Corey, there exists the creative license to develop more of an entertaining sarcasm and wise guy wit. Through this character, the author serves up a more rough around the edges, non-politically correct fare.

Fictional themes, people and places in general can often have a germinated basis in reality. Some have speculated whether John Corey's persona could be one of the author's alter egos."

This smacks of, for example, a journalist who doesn't like a policy stating "many people have expressed serious reservations about the Senator's plan, stating that it could destroy democracy as we know it" with no attribution, only "some" or "many people". It's a way to inject opinion.

It is also a big stretch to look at someone's fictional character and then simplistically draw the character's attributes onto the author. It's an even bigger stretch to take character attributes and apply them not as characteristics of the author, but of what the author WISHED he could be.

No offense to the original author- what you say certainly could be true, but I'd like to see some attribution, such as a response from DeMille in an interview. 64.94.189.211 (talk) 20:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)