From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Merge proposal 1.1 Beginning major renovation 1.2 Lead 1.3 Kingdom Hospital entry: lifted? 2 Other books not included

[edit] Merge proposal

There is a lot of useful information in this article, but it should be disseminated to the articles on the novels and films under discussion. The King novel articles are sorely in need of expansion and sources, and additionally, there is no pressing reason for this article to coexist with articles on every single work it addresses. Chris Stangl 01:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree. Merging this article into the individual articles on the stories would only mean the information would get muddled and lost. As a stand-alone article this is very interesting information that can't really be found compiled elsewhere (that I know of). As I suggested in the talk on the Stephen King page, I think references should be placed within the articles on the individual works, but keep this article as is. LACameraman 09:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

The information could be dispersed intact to the individual books and movies in "Background" or "Inspiration" subsections... sections which those articles should have, especially since most of the King articles are information-starved and poorly sourced. It seems unlikely a user would search "Stephen King's inspiration", not just "Pet Sematary" or "Stephen King" - I only found the article while checking "What links here" pages. It is a fun read, though... Maybe I'm concerned the article feels like a "list", and needs sharper focus or some cohesion. Star Wars sources and analogues is not perfect, but has an overall shape that gives it a reason to be a separate article Chris Stangl 21:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Chris - I commented on the Talk:Stephen King page. I'd be interested in taking a crack at expanding the article if the vote is to keep it. Seems like, currently, we're the only two considering the matter.

[edit] Beginning major renovation

I initially thought this would be a fairly easy article to clean up, but upon further inspection I see it's going to be a chore. The original creator very painstakingly put this information together, but there are irrelevant areas (such as the reference to the film adaptations of Carrie), inaccurate or frivilous citations (leading to background images on Stephen King's website) and most of the citations are not from the author himself. King has spoken, and written, many times about his various inspirations. Each passage needs to be expanded as much as possible and to be verified as close to King's own writing as possible. Interviews with King are second best, supposition in some entertainment journalist's review should be an extreme last resort. This will be a slow process, for sure.LACameraman 09:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Woof. Okay, I did expansion on the Carrie section. I can also see that, as I'm expanding here, I've got to make expansions/edits to the specific articles on each book to avoid redundant information and help expand all articles. I'm also noticing that the references are going to grow quickly. Anyone have any suggestions on refining those? This will be slow going, for sure. LACameraman 21:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I turned the source notes into small fonts, which is a start. I guess. Chris Stangl 08:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lead

Lead needs a re-write. The first sentence does not give a true introduction to the article. Iolakana|^(talk) 19:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kingdom Hospital entry: lifted?

It reads like a pretty serious lift of the MSNBC article that it eventually cites. —Eric S. Smith 02:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other books not included

There are some books not included here please play them here and try to find info on them.

• Cell
• Insomnia