Talk:Ken Follett's The Pillars of the Earth
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ken Follett's The Pillars of the Earth article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find video game sources: "Ken Follett's The Pillars of the Earth" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Deletion
editHello. Not sure exactly where/how to handle this, as it is my first time to try and deal with this situation.
Anyway, this page (which was in the process of actively being improved) was recently deleted by User:Orangemike, the reason given being Wikipedia:Patent nonsense (i.e. incoherent text or gibberish). I would disagree (and argue the deletion as being too hastily carried out), and state that a speedy deletion was given in spite of evidence that the article was (based on the edit history) in a clear process of being rapidly copyedited and improved by myself. As context, the Patent Nonsense page states that:
- "The following should not be speedy deleted as patent nonsense..."
- "Poorly written content that can be improved..."
and
- "Dealing with patent nonsense—use your good judgment to decide which is most appropriate:"
- Replace it with a well-written article.
- Move it to the page's talk page.
- Move it to the user's talk page.
As the creator of approximately 80 wikipedia pages, I do not take the creation of pages lightly, nor take the editing of live pages lightly (as evident in my editing history), and would like to suggest a reversal of the deletion based on my feeling that is was deleted prematurely (prior to the option of pursuing a deletion review). Thank you.Jabberjawjapan (talk) 05:47, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Chapter names
editI'm not sure whether the chapter names find good use in this article, as their follow-up contents are rather little and as such we have a dozen bullet points of short sentences. Furthermore, I believe that it falls off our WP:VGSCOPE as excessive fictional detail. If possible, the plot section should be rewritten to make for one concise synopsis summary. Also, the book names should be italicized as creative works. Lordtobi (✉) 12:15, 5 April 2018 (UTC)