Talk:Forever (novel)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article has an incomplete infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Request clarification
- Does the book actually have explicit images (pictures, diagrams -- visual representations), or is it explicit text, or was the word meant to be "imagery" (something symbolic)?
- Explicit text, and not all that explicit either. Pretty tame by 2006 standards. The primary objection that most often got this book challenged was the fact that it was depicting a sexual relationship between two teenagers who do not experience guilt, remorse or serious consequences afterwards.
The book does not contain sexually explicit images (or indeed any images). The text, whilst referring to the subject of sex, is not pornographic. Blume uses the possibly unusual tecnique of Michael referring to his penis as "Ralph"; possibly a technique by Blume to avoid frequent use of the word "penis". (I actually added this information to the main article, but it was flagged as vandalism by an over-zealous moderator!). "Jerk, Beefy!" 15:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
i lvoe the way he calles his penis ralph i always wanted to have it inside me 217.36.215.32 15:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Project Muse link
The internet link to Project Muse comes up with a restricted access page and a very general description of the article. A better link or better referenced material is needed. Zotdragon 18:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- Right, but the scholars who really care about this likely have access to Project Muse. Johns Hopkins University is a major source of often unbiased information. Hey, I noticed you removed quote marks from a quotation -- you shouldn't change quotes in that fashion. --SafeLibraries 23:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- By the way, you also removed a "dead link," you know, one of those red ones. The red ones are red for several reasons. 1) They are a warning that the underlying link is dead so people are not lulled into clicking on them. 2) They are an invitation to others to add a page to Wikipedia to something that might be worthwhile. Therefore, I'm going to revert your edit on this, and while I'm at it, I'll revert your edit that changed quoted material. I'm sure this is okay by you. Thanks. --SafeLibraries 12:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- No, it's not okay by me, don't presume to undertake anything in my name. I removed the dead link because it's been there for far too long. If someone actually wanted to, an article would have been created for the company but no one has bothered (at least as of yet); but it's not a point worth arguing. I didn't remove quote marks from the quotation, I added them. However, if you would like the name of a novel not to be capitalized, that's your choice. I simply find it questionable. My point on the link still stands, referenced material should be open to all Wiki users, not just "scholars." I'm not questioning the reference, just the link. Zotdragon 16:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Okay. I'll assume we have a minor misunderstanding. Like the dead link you say has been up for "too long" was there for just a day or so. --SafeLibraries 23:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- No, it's not okay by me, don't presume to undertake anything in my name. I removed the dead link because it's been there for far too long. If someone actually wanted to, an article would have been created for the company but no one has bothered (at least as of yet); but it's not a point worth arguing. I didn't remove quote marks from the quotation, I added them. However, if you would like the name of a novel not to be capitalized, that's your choice. I simply find it questionable. My point on the link still stands, referenced material should be open to all Wiki users, not just "scholars." I'm not questioning the reference, just the link. Zotdragon 16:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- By the way, you also removed a "dead link," you know, one of those red ones. The red ones are red for several reasons. 1) They are a warning that the underlying link is dead so people are not lulled into clicking on them. 2) They are an invitation to others to add a page to Wikipedia to something that might be worthwhile. Therefore, I'm going to revert your edit on this, and while I'm at it, I'll revert your edit that changed quoted material. I'm sure this is okay by you. Thanks. --SafeLibraries 12:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
