Talk:Ice Station (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. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article has an infobox template in need of a 1st Edition Cover! | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
Ice Station (novel) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
The articel as currently writen sounds far more like a publisher's blurb than an encyclopedia article. The closing elipsis in particular is simply a bad idea, IMO. DES 17:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC) Agreed. Ive only edited a few pages before, and i didnt want to tread on anyones toes by deleting what they have written (although it sounds like they enjoy just getting off writing words like enigmatic) plus i thought the whole point of these types of pages was not to advetise books but to present the facts (which is why the bit at the top says "spoiler") This is my first edit on Wiki, so bear with me if I make a few mistakes here. I've read Ice Station a few times, so i've gone through and edited the mistakes in the plot summary, added a background section at the top and fixed up various formatting, grammer and spelling mistakes in the article. Can someone check over what I've done and confirm that it's correct? --Stretch 06:26, 26 September 2005 (UTC) My god.
- You rang Cdinesh? --Stretch 01:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Citations - none, but if someone adds a few it will make a huge difference Iciac 08:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC) With regards to the inaccuracies section: "Several times throughout the novel, Reilly has lower ranking enlisted personnel address higher ranking enlisted personnel as "Sir". In the U.S. military, and especially in the U.S. Marine Corps addressing an enlisted man as "Sir" is seen as a slight, or at least mildly offensive." Matthew Reilly is an Australian author, and as far as I know, in the Australian army, personnel of higher rank than sergeant are usually referred to as "Sir". --203.164.95.67 08:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC) No, the Australian army never refers to any NCO's, (Warrant Officers included,) as 'sir.' If you did say this to a WO, you should expect the curt reply, "Don't call me sir, I work for a living!" It was a mistake that stuck out to me all the way through the book, and in the other Matthew Reilly books too. Otherwise I really enjoyed them. The Bryce (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC) "The SAS unit use a "Nitrogen grenade". A small explosive that contains super-cooled liquid nitrogen. However this device is infeasible as any explosive force used to detonate the grenade would heat the nitrogen to the point where it would turn into gas." This is not neccessarily true. One could use gas propulsion by either storing compressed gas inside the grenade or use an explosive that rapidly dissintergrates into gas with minimal heat generation. Correct. It's not certain how Reilly expected this grenade to work, so I think the comment should be removed. A detonation doesn't necessarily require an explosion to the extent that would vaporise the liquid nitrogen. The Bryce (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
