![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Was the book published in 2004? The earliest copy I can find is 2006? Fothergill Volkensniff IV ( talk) 15:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
re: this section removed from the article to here:
There is no problem discussing this aspect, but it needs to be sourced and re-worded. As is, it reads like original research. I've read the intro and ending and it wasn't "faintly defensive", in fact it is very direct what the situation is and why they did what they did - no artificial scandal needed. He wanted to 5 volumes to increase sales over a longer period of time to provide support for his wife and family, while his executors felt the novel was more aesthetic as a whole. As for there being a "a bit of dithering", that needs to be sourced and clarified exactly what "dithering" means - who said what where when and why, otherwise this just reads like a gossip column. 71.191.40.106 ( talk) 01:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
The section here that is described as a synopsis is nothing of the sort. It needs relabeling, but it would be cavalier for me to do this, I think. Macphysto ( talk) 10:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, this novel is incredibly difficult to describe, even for professional reviewers not under the POV limitations of Wikipedia. For example this sentence:
Focused? The novel isn't focused on anything. Yet, how does one say it? Fothergill Volkensniff IV ( talk) 01:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Isn't there a mention of the year 2666 in The Savage Detectives? Belano _is_ the narrator of 2666 acording to Bolaño's notes on the book. -- Crio de la Paz ( talk) 22:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Was the book published in 2004? The earliest copy I can find is 2006? Fothergill Volkensniff IV ( talk) 15:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
re: this section removed from the article to here:
There is no problem discussing this aspect, but it needs to be sourced and re-worded. As is, it reads like original research. I've read the intro and ending and it wasn't "faintly defensive", in fact it is very direct what the situation is and why they did what they did - no artificial scandal needed. He wanted to 5 volumes to increase sales over a longer period of time to provide support for his wife and family, while his executors felt the novel was more aesthetic as a whole. As for there being a "a bit of dithering", that needs to be sourced and clarified exactly what "dithering" means - who said what where when and why, otherwise this just reads like a gossip column. 71.191.40.106 ( talk) 01:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
The section here that is described as a synopsis is nothing of the sort. It needs relabeling, but it would be cavalier for me to do this, I think. Macphysto ( talk) 10:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, this novel is incredibly difficult to describe, even for professional reviewers not under the POV limitations of Wikipedia. For example this sentence:
Focused? The novel isn't focused on anything. Yet, how does one say it? Fothergill Volkensniff IV ( talk) 01:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Isn't there a mention of the year 2666 in The Savage Detectives? Belano _is_ the narrator of 2666 acording to Bolaño's notes on the book. -- Crio de la Paz ( talk) 22:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)