This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I reverted the changes by 70.24.71.215, as they were made with no edit summary or explanation on the talk page. However, this source suggests that soil is only slightly more dense than water, which leads to the calculation that the room is somewhat less than 2m long. -- David.Mestel 19:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that "Artistic License" is a rather generous way to describe the glaring errors in the book, as it implies that they are mostly deliberate, which is clearly not true. Perhaps "Factual Errors" would be a better title for the third section. WP:BOLD notwithstanding, I feel that it is important to obtain consensus before changing this. -- David.Mestel 18:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Where has this section gone? It is linked to from Dan Brown. Billlion 17:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
It seems, in my honorable opinion, that this article focuses on the flaws of the book, and not if it was commercially successful or not. If it was a bomb, state so, not just a list of "artistic freedoms".
- Caleb Osment 09:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps move it all to a new seperate article "Criticisms of the Da vinci code" - personally I think that having this much in an "artistic license" section in a main article is unprofessional, and turning it into a bulletin board. (This unsigned comment posted by Gruffy at 20:17, 17 January 2006)
This book is followed by Angels and Demons?? How is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.65.181.160 ( talk) 21:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
"Hulohot: A deaf assassin from Japan hired to hunt down Ensei Tankado and take the ring." As far as I know, he was described as a Portuguese mercenary, not originated from Japan. Could anyone confirm this? Hulohot User:81.193.43.242 15:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Hulohot it's definately a portuguese name but the books says he was born in Lisbon or Lisboa, Portugal's capital. It might be a nickname or a codename. Assassin's don't usually reveal their real names. Don't you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.43.242 ( talk) 15:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Alright... Dan Brown is not as accurate as the pretext says. But it seems to be a sport these days to fill Dan Brown-related Wikipedia articles with every inane little error one can think of, down to how many times a telephone rings or not! This article alone dedicates 50-75% of its bulk to nitpicking. It's absurd and must be contained.
So... suggestions? -- J-Star 10:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
This article says Digital Fortress is published 1996. Many other wikipedias says originally is published 1998. (checked also Finnish book. Origin 1998. However, most translates are published after da Vinci-code.)
Where is mistake? -- EsaL-74 ( talk) 03:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
This book is one of my favorites (a little odd, seeing as I'm not even 14) but the plot description is short, boring, and straight from the back of the book. Can someone change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.169.115 ( talk) 00:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Exactly. This book is one of my favourites too and I am not even 14 (I am going to have my 12th birthday tomorrow.) The synopsis is straight out of the book jacket... Come on guys, we can do better than that... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.18.180 ( talk) 13:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that the new synopsis is a complete summary of the book. While I appreciate that the book-jacket summary has been removed, the new summary is stuffed with spoilers. Why not add a spoiler warning, or put a new synopsis minus the spoilers? In case the new summary has to be edited, I would love to do it. Please consider my points. Thanks Incredisuper ( talk) 08:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't know that. Sorry :) Incredisuper ( talk) 08:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Last time I visited here there was nice article regarding the book's flaws. Where is it? Why would someone delete such a facinating part? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FleetCommand ( talk • contribs) 06:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC).
Any material added to Wikipedia articles must be supported by reliable, verifiable sources explicitly cited in the text. Creating sections or adding material to the article regarding factual, technical or historical errors based solely on the personal knowledge of the editor adding that info is called Original Research, and is prohibited. And keep in mind that when we talk about sources, we don't simply mean sources that establish the real-life "truth", but that it must mention this in specific relation to the novel. If it doesn't mention the novel, it violates WP:SYNTH. Similarly, such material should not be added to Talk Pages like this one, unless a source is being cited, as Wikipedia Talk Pages are not message boards or forums for general discussion of the article's topic. Nightscream ( talk) 17:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
editsemiprotected}}
The title of the Slovak translation is invalid, it points to a different book (Deception point). So please change "Bod klamu" to " Digitálna pevnosť".
89.173.26.251 ( talk) 21:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Googling Bod klamu shows that it is definitely the Slovak title of Deception Point. Further, the Deception Point article lists Bod klamu as the Slovak version title. Googling Digitálna pevnos shows that this would be the proper title as the IP stated. Beach drifter ( talk) 00:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
That link indeed supports Bod klamu, but not Digitálna pevnosť, so why do you keep changing it to Digitálna pevnosť? If you want to to include another title, or a translation, then you need a source, not "common sense" or Google translations. Look closely at the rest of the list. Do you see that in some cases, a translation is placed next to the foreign language title in parenthesis? That's because in those cases, that translated title also appears on the cover at whatever source is cited. You're saying that what, we should translate all of them? Even the Korean, Serbian, etc.? What for? Remember, everything in articles must be supported by sources. If a source doesn't support this, then not only should it not be included, but there's no reason to. Whatever the sources indicate is sufficient. Nightscream ( talk) 19:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Have no fear, I have emailed Random House and I'm sure they will be fixing the error sometime in the next millennia. Beach drifter ( talk) 20:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
For the section "Foreign language editions":
Digitaalne kindlus - Estonian
reference: http://tallinn.ester.ee/record=b2060286~S1 90.191.38.184 ( talk) 18:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
For the section "Foreign language editions":
Ciparu cietoksnis - Latvian
http://www.jr.lv/lv/veikals/prece/index.html?shop_id=238637
85.255.73.234 ( talk) 15:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Should there be a trivia section added, or something of the sort, since the alleged Jon Benet Ramsey killer John Mark Karr was seen reading this book on his flight back into the USA? I thought it was pretty interesting. Batman6 05:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
{{ edit semi-protected}} Tankado's real last name was Numataka. It's right in the book. His father is the real antagonist, not Strathmore
72.10.96.51 ( talk) 15:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm currently reading this book and I'm disappointed with the sloppy use of Japanese words, names, and cultural references (seems to be a common problem among western writers).
The first name "Ensei," though old fashioned, is acceptable, but the last name "Tankado" sounds more like the name of a street or a bar than a person and is not listed in the Japanese Name Dictionary (WWWJDIC).
Likewise the name "Numataka" is probably fabricated. "Tokugen" is listed in the name dictionary.
In Chapter 13, Numataka is called "akuta same -- the deadly shark." The word 'same' is correct but I'm unsure where 'akuta' comes from. It's possible Brown meant to use 'akuma' -- demon, or 'akutama' -- villain/bad guy.
In Chapter 18, "menboko -- honor and face" is mentioned, but this should be 'menboku.'
At the end of the same chapter, he makes reference to "shichigosan -- the seven deities of good luck" but 'shichigosan' actually refers to a festival celebrating children's health at the ages of 7 (shichi), 5 (go) and 3 (san). The seven deities of luck are 'shichifukujin.'
This is as far as I've read.
Neill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redhead1978jp ( talk • contribs) 10:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I reverted the changes by 70.24.71.215, as they were made with no edit summary or explanation on the talk page. However, this source suggests that soil is only slightly more dense than water, which leads to the calculation that the room is somewhat less than 2m long. -- David.Mestel 19:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that "Artistic License" is a rather generous way to describe the glaring errors in the book, as it implies that they are mostly deliberate, which is clearly not true. Perhaps "Factual Errors" would be a better title for the third section. WP:BOLD notwithstanding, I feel that it is important to obtain consensus before changing this. -- David.Mestel 18:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Where has this section gone? It is linked to from Dan Brown. Billlion 17:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
It seems, in my honorable opinion, that this article focuses on the flaws of the book, and not if it was commercially successful or not. If it was a bomb, state so, not just a list of "artistic freedoms".
- Caleb Osment 09:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps move it all to a new seperate article "Criticisms of the Da vinci code" - personally I think that having this much in an "artistic license" section in a main article is unprofessional, and turning it into a bulletin board. (This unsigned comment posted by Gruffy at 20:17, 17 January 2006)
This book is followed by Angels and Demons?? How is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.65.181.160 ( talk) 21:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
"Hulohot: A deaf assassin from Japan hired to hunt down Ensei Tankado and take the ring." As far as I know, he was described as a Portuguese mercenary, not originated from Japan. Could anyone confirm this? Hulohot User:81.193.43.242 15:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Hulohot it's definately a portuguese name but the books says he was born in Lisbon or Lisboa, Portugal's capital. It might be a nickname or a codename. Assassin's don't usually reveal their real names. Don't you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.43.242 ( talk) 15:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Alright... Dan Brown is not as accurate as the pretext says. But it seems to be a sport these days to fill Dan Brown-related Wikipedia articles with every inane little error one can think of, down to how many times a telephone rings or not! This article alone dedicates 50-75% of its bulk to nitpicking. It's absurd and must be contained.
So... suggestions? -- J-Star 10:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
This article says Digital Fortress is published 1996. Many other wikipedias says originally is published 1998. (checked also Finnish book. Origin 1998. However, most translates are published after da Vinci-code.)
Where is mistake? -- EsaL-74 ( talk) 03:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
This book is one of my favorites (a little odd, seeing as I'm not even 14) but the plot description is short, boring, and straight from the back of the book. Can someone change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.169.115 ( talk) 00:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Exactly. This book is one of my favourites too and I am not even 14 (I am going to have my 12th birthday tomorrow.) The synopsis is straight out of the book jacket... Come on guys, we can do better than that... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.18.180 ( talk) 13:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that the new synopsis is a complete summary of the book. While I appreciate that the book-jacket summary has been removed, the new summary is stuffed with spoilers. Why not add a spoiler warning, or put a new synopsis minus the spoilers? In case the new summary has to be edited, I would love to do it. Please consider my points. Thanks Incredisuper ( talk) 08:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't know that. Sorry :) Incredisuper ( talk) 08:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Last time I visited here there was nice article regarding the book's flaws. Where is it? Why would someone delete such a facinating part? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FleetCommand ( talk • contribs) 06:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC).
Any material added to Wikipedia articles must be supported by reliable, verifiable sources explicitly cited in the text. Creating sections or adding material to the article regarding factual, technical or historical errors based solely on the personal knowledge of the editor adding that info is called Original Research, and is prohibited. And keep in mind that when we talk about sources, we don't simply mean sources that establish the real-life "truth", but that it must mention this in specific relation to the novel. If it doesn't mention the novel, it violates WP:SYNTH. Similarly, such material should not be added to Talk Pages like this one, unless a source is being cited, as Wikipedia Talk Pages are not message boards or forums for general discussion of the article's topic. Nightscream ( talk) 17:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
editsemiprotected}}
The title of the Slovak translation is invalid, it points to a different book (Deception point). So please change "Bod klamu" to " Digitálna pevnosť".
89.173.26.251 ( talk) 21:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Googling Bod klamu shows that it is definitely the Slovak title of Deception Point. Further, the Deception Point article lists Bod klamu as the Slovak version title. Googling Digitálna pevnos shows that this would be the proper title as the IP stated. Beach drifter ( talk) 00:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
That link indeed supports Bod klamu, but not Digitálna pevnosť, so why do you keep changing it to Digitálna pevnosť? If you want to to include another title, or a translation, then you need a source, not "common sense" or Google translations. Look closely at the rest of the list. Do you see that in some cases, a translation is placed next to the foreign language title in parenthesis? That's because in those cases, that translated title also appears on the cover at whatever source is cited. You're saying that what, we should translate all of them? Even the Korean, Serbian, etc.? What for? Remember, everything in articles must be supported by sources. If a source doesn't support this, then not only should it not be included, but there's no reason to. Whatever the sources indicate is sufficient. Nightscream ( talk) 19:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Have no fear, I have emailed Random House and I'm sure they will be fixing the error sometime in the next millennia. Beach drifter ( talk) 20:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
For the section "Foreign language editions":
Digitaalne kindlus - Estonian
reference: http://tallinn.ester.ee/record=b2060286~S1 90.191.38.184 ( talk) 18:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
For the section "Foreign language editions":
Ciparu cietoksnis - Latvian
http://www.jr.lv/lv/veikals/prece/index.html?shop_id=238637
85.255.73.234 ( talk) 15:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Should there be a trivia section added, or something of the sort, since the alleged Jon Benet Ramsey killer John Mark Karr was seen reading this book on his flight back into the USA? I thought it was pretty interesting. Batman6 05:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
{{ edit semi-protected}} Tankado's real last name was Numataka. It's right in the book. His father is the real antagonist, not Strathmore
72.10.96.51 ( talk) 15:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm currently reading this book and I'm disappointed with the sloppy use of Japanese words, names, and cultural references (seems to be a common problem among western writers).
The first name "Ensei," though old fashioned, is acceptable, but the last name "Tankado" sounds more like the name of a street or a bar than a person and is not listed in the Japanese Name Dictionary (WWWJDIC).
Likewise the name "Numataka" is probably fabricated. "Tokugen" is listed in the name dictionary.
In Chapter 13, Numataka is called "akuta same -- the deadly shark." The word 'same' is correct but I'm unsure where 'akuta' comes from. It's possible Brown meant to use 'akuma' -- demon, or 'akutama' -- villain/bad guy.
In Chapter 18, "menboko -- honor and face" is mentioned, but this should be 'menboku.'
At the end of the same chapter, he makes reference to "shichigosan -- the seven deities of good luck" but 'shichigosan' actually refers to a festival celebrating children's health at the ages of 7 (shichi), 5 (go) and 3 (san). The seven deities of luck are 'shichifukujin.'
This is as far as I've read.
Neill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redhead1978jp ( talk • contribs) 10:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)