Talk:The Quiet American

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has an incomplete infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Southeast Asia-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as start on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, an attempt to provide information in a consistent format for articles about international organizations, diplomats, international meetings, and relations between states. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Article split

I noticed that there as an article split notice at the top of the page, but I see no rationale for that on this talk page. I think it would be best as one article until it gets too big. So I'm removing the notice. LittleDan^talk 01:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't looked at this for a while, & now I see that User:Jazk34 did in fact split the article (into 3 - one for each film version) back on July 17. I mention it here just to clarify the article history, since the edit summaries provided no clue. Editors, please remember to use edit summaries and talk pages when doing that kind of thing... ←Hob 22:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smith unidentified

The article at one point says: "As Smith asserts in her foreword to the 2002 Vintage edition..." There is no other mention of this 'Smith' anywhere in the article. This needs to be fixed by whoever knows anything about such matters. Tm19 23:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It's Zadie Smith; that edition is ISBN 0099478390 if you want to find it. I'll fix the name just to make the article less confusing, but I don't think the Smith quote really adds much, and the Themes section needs trimming in general - lots of redundancy and occasional POV. ←Hob 22:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lengthy "themes" section

This was just a long and vague collection of thoughts and interpretation and was highly subjective. More specifically it is in clear breach of WP:OR. Wikipedia is not an essay forum for lengthy and half-baked analysis of books, films etc, it's an encyclopedia - anyone who wants this section to remain in needs to justify why it should be here. Plus whoever put it back reinserted typos. Thanks --Nickhh 17:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the section resembled certain study guides (eg this one) and might therefore be a copyright violation. Sciurinæ 17:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I also thought that might have been the case, at least when it was originally added (which of course only adds to the problems with having it here). And people have added their own occasional thoughts to it as well over time I think, which in turn compounds the OR problem. --Nickhh 08:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Can people please stop putting their endless personal interpretations of what the novel is about and what its characters are supposed to signify or not into this article? Wikipedia is not a collaborative/consensus discussion board for amateur (or even professional) book reviewers and literary/political analysts. And, just as one example, it's going to be hard to justify this kind of statement, whatever source you try to dig up for it - "Greene's novel was received with wide condemnation". Please read policies onno original research and verifiable sources if you're new to this. I'm going to revert a whole load of recent changes. --Nickhh 19:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Pssst... when i publish my PhD, i'm coming back with it and reinserting my discussion. That alright? DaveofDundee (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)