Talk:Garth Nix
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm wondering whether the rather stubby articles on the books in the Abhorsen Trilogy should be expanded or subsumed into this article. Any ideas, anyone? --Phil | Talk 15:54, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)
I'd say leave them as seperate articles. Otherwise they're bound to keep popping up whenever a great fan of the books joins wikipedia, which I do believe will continue happening. Sometimes these things have a life of their own. You can expand them if you wish to, I'm not even sure that's necessary. BTW, did you read my note to you on your talk page? --Woggly 05:24, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I'm wondering why there is a seperate article for "The Creature in the Case" when it is a novella WITHIN "Across the Wall". I suggest moving it into the "Across the Wall" page. Nihiltres 01:13, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Because "The Creature in the Case" was published as a stand-alone short book BEFORE it was anthologized in "Across the Wall". I imagine there a many who have heard of "The Creature in the Case" but not of "Across the Wall" (myself included, up to just now). What would be very nice, is if someone who actually has a copy of "Across the Wall" could list the titles of the other stories in this collection. --Woggly 18:29, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Does "Across the Wall" have anything to do with the whole necromancer series?
- Abhorsen123 02:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- "Across the Wall" is a collection of short stories, one of which is set in Ancelstierre, the others are unrelated to the Old Kingdom Trilogy
12.17.189.77 21:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Would anyone think that merging the "Across the Wall" and "Creature in the Case" into would link would be acceptable? Morrowulf 21:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's probably not a good idea. Although there is only one article describing the "Across the Wall" book and the "Creature in the Case" novella, they are only together as one article because individual articles would be too stubby. Since the "Creature in the Case" was widely distributed only as part of the "Across the Wall" book, the articles are identical. The "Creature in the Case" however, was printed separately specially initially, and so should probably have its own link. If we merge the links, we lose the information that the "Creature in the Case" was initially published separately. If we unlink one of the two, it looks like we lack information on that one. Therefore, keeping both linked to the same page is probably the best option. Nihiltres 22:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I suggest redirecting "The creature in the case" ot Across the wall--Orannis the Destroyer 06:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orannis the Ninth Bright Shiner (talk • contribs)
Contents |
[edit] Calusari
I added a Nix's book The Calusari to the other works section. I've never read the book, don't even know when it was published, but if anyone does know, we should probably put in that info! Emmett5 17:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pseudonym
Is it really necessary to state that "Garth Nix is not a pseudonym"? This is the only article which says that about anyone.
I think so, "Garth Nix" sounds like a pseudonym, especially since he writes dark fantasy. Emmett5 20:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] HarperCollins Children's Books Editions
Should I include the date of the Children's Books Printing. It is later than the London release dates, and also is from London.
In addition the covers are different, featuring a panorama view of the main character(s) (including for Abhorsen and Lirael, the Disreputable Dog. Should I upload these and add to the various Book pages? Or is it surplus given the existing adult books fantasy images.
Thanks in advance Philipwhiuk 19:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 16:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FanLit.net link
I added a link to FanLit.net because it's a better resource than what is present. I think editors don't like that it's a newer resource, but it is better than those up here that have ads and not much useful content (I have even seen portals in the links for some authors). This is the kind of information readers want -- book covers, publication dates, reviews. I am a user of the website and find it very helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chraak (talk • contribs) 14:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)