Talk:Never Let Me Go

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Books Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

	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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments The following comments were left by the assessors: (edit · refresh) This significant recent novel is rated "B" although it could really do with more material to create a ==Literary significance & criticism== section. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Clean up 2 Hailsham 3 Spoilers 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Never Let Me Go.jpg

[edit] Clean up

I'm taking the cleanup tag down, because all of the glaring issues- POV, unsourced statements, one-sentence paragraphs, etc.- seem to have been dealt with. Nonetheless, the article still needs some heady expansion. Stilgar135 15:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hailsham

is this any connection to the market town of hailsham in east sussex?

No, according to Margaret Atwood "Hailsham" comes from Dickens: "The narrator, Kathy H., is looking back on her school days at a superficially idyllic establishment called Hailsham. (As in "sham"; as in Charles Dickens' Miss Havisham, exploiter of uncomprehending children.)" this is a quote from Atwoods review in Slate posted on April 1, 2005 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.28.168 (talk) 13:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoilers

Did you have to spoil the whole novel in the first two lines? You're not supposed to know it's about clones. Somebody at least try to warn people thinking on reading the book but who don't want to be spoiled the whole fun. sheesh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.184.122.32 (talk) 16:31, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

If you don't want the plot to be revealed, you shouldn't read a section titled "Plot summary"! Eubulide (talk) 18:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment here: there is far too much "spoiling" going on in wikipedia's entries about books, and the text here [in its present version] really & fully destroys the reading adventure for any prospective reader. Of course Eubulide's comment is valid, but it then takes a very conscious effort, on the part of a reader, to shut all windows for a full week, while one reads a book. It is perfectly possible, though, to have wikipedia articles about books without divulging their inner secrets as openly as here. (Luckily I read the book without knowing a thing in advance. Poor readers who read this article first.) Slavatrudu (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I understand your point, but it is not in Wikipedia's spirit to suppress information because some readers may not want to know it. As long as the spoilers are clearly marked (in this case by the section heading Plot Summary), readers have the possibility to avoid them.See the following style guides, that make the point quite clear: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels/Style_guidelines#Plot_summary, Wikipedia:Content_disclaimer, Wikipedia:Spoiler_warning. In particular the last guideline explicitly states: "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article about a work of fiction because you think it spoils the plot." Eubulide (talk) 10:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Lame. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.8.250.143 (talk) 12:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Never Let Me Go.jpg

Image:Never Let Me Go.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) 21:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)