Talk:Exodus (novel)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Much Editing Needed
Shouldn't there be some kind of plot section? Most other important books have one with a {{spoiler}} tag. E=MC^2 T@lk 17:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
A spoiler is definitely needed... have added one. Kelmaon 08:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Also, there is much wikifying to be done. I'm beginning to feel that this article needs a {{cleanup}} tag. E=MC^2 T@lk 17:52, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Another thing, there is no reference in the book to Yakov Rabinsky's last name changing to Ben Canaan, only first name to Akiva. I'm going to get to work on this soon. E=MC^2 T@lk 17:55, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
E=MC^2: the book Exodus is my personal favorite in all of literature. If you request it, i would gladly help you fill in the holes of the exodus page, although im not especially experienced at "wiki". Just tell me what you need done!
-The Judaic Jedi
The operation was carried under the auspices of the Mossad Le'Aliya Bet, not Mossad as indicated.
[edit] Ambiguity
There is at least one other novel called "Exodus": the one by Julie Bertagna, so the title of this article "Exodus (novel)" is not very good. – b_jonas 16:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] And about Brazil?
Yes, I know that´s the talk page is about the book, but there´s an error in it. Leon Uris wrote good and great things about the State of Israel and its people, and even me, a zionist critic, liked the book. The end was insensible but doesn´t break the magic of the book. The problem created by Uris was the fact that Brazil was the last country to give the vote for the creation of the Jewish State. It´s an absurd that many people like this book but don´t have the curiosity to know the truth. Alias, the name of the man who gave the vote according to the creation of Israel is Oswaldo Aranha. That´s all. Ken Bruce April 29, 2006 São Paulo, Brazil (I won´t put the time because I´m tired to do it!)
This book, despite the criticisms, isn't anti-Arab. It simply shows the ignorance and hatred of the Arab states such as Syria, Iran and Iraq towards Israel after its creation. These sames countries still hate Israel to this day because it is actually a successful state instead of an ignorant, Islamic fundamentalist state where the people starve because there governments are too busy supporting islamic terrorism. Uris is stating reality and I don't think that can be considered something you can criticize.
[edit] Unsourced original research criticism
PatGallacher, in February 2005 you introduced a paragraph consisting entirely of unsourced original research, and filled with weasel words (e.g. "many claim", "some claim"). Since then various editors have tried to delete it, and you have been returning it with generally meaningless or disingenuous edit summaries, e.g. "rv deletion of legitimate comment" "rv - seems reasonable comments". You know that this passage violates policy; why did you insert it, and why do you keep reverting it back when it is quite reasonably deleted? Jayjg (talk) 01:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Well if you grant that argument you could delete some other significant points in this article. PatGallacher 01:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
We're discussing the section that you inserted, and repeatedly reverted, for almost 2 years. Do you have any other defense for doing so, besides "other people did it too"? Jayjg (talk) 02:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't know if this has anything to do with PatGallacher's efforts, but the Literary significance & criticisms section is awfully abbreviated and its introductory sentence proceeds as follows: "Most complaints about the book are from those who can't tell the difference between a historical novel and a true footnoted history." It seems rather casual-worded and unprofessional, oughtn't somebody amend it? Firebreeze 19:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it's unprofessional, but it's actually fairly accurate. What wording do you suggest? -- Ynhockey (Talk) 14:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Characters section
I hate to say it, but the characters section could use a lot of cleaning up. For instance, one of the lines in Ari's section is like so.
He may be at least partially based on Yitzhak Rabin. He is probably based partially on Yigal Allon, and his brother possibly on Menachem Begin, but more on Avraham Stern. Actually Ari Ben Canaan is based upon Moshe Dayan.
Someone really needs to clarify this. It sounds like a 4th grader wrote it. I'm in 8th grade, and I could do better in my sleep. I just don't have the time. LonelyPker 22:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
What about Mark Parker? He should probably be listed too. LK 15:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Spoilers
I think that a spoiler warning should be added or some sentences taken out of the article, such as the one that reveals Karen's fate at the end of the book. LK 15:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Please add criticisms and reception. Thank you
[edit] Criticisms / reception section
Uh, yeah, this thing is an awful mess and looks to be fallout from last year's edit war. "complaints about the book are from those who can't tell the difference between a historical novel and a true footnoted history?" Not exactly neutral and totally un-encyclopedic. This book has been extensively reviewed and discussed, and I'm sure we can find legitimate, sourced criticisms and responses to criticism. ("Exodus as a Zionist Melodrama" in "Further Reading" looks like a promising start.) Right now, the section practically says, "this is a great book and anyone who criticizes it is ignorant and biased if not outright anti-semitic!!1one!" <eleland/talkedits> 19:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. Some cited properly articulated criticism is needed to balance the article. Donama (talk) 05:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed again. I came to this page just to find some basic information on how this novel is regarded, and I got the "rebuttal" that appears here. If legitimate arguments for and against the novel exist in published journals, let them be cited here. For now, since it makes no citations, up goes Template:Unreferencedsection. Michael Patrick (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Exodusuris.jpg
Image:Exodusuris.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)