Talk:Shantaram (novel)

This bit is POV

"Apart from having this highly unusual personal background, Greg Roberts is a very gifted writer. His book is a blend of vivid dialogue, unforgettable characters, amazing adventures, and superb evocations of Indian life. It can be read as a vast, extended thriller, as well as a superbly written meditation on the nature of good and evil. It is a compelling tale of a hunted man who had lost everything - his home, his family, and his soul - and came to find his humanity while living at the wildest edge of experience."

Not only is this POV, it sounds like a press release. --Pellet 23:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• It's a cut n paste of a review[1]. I've removed it. --Ezeu 00:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

cum up wid sumthing new gurl.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.119.197.70 (talk) 05:40, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Not autobiography

See [Question 7 answer]. It reads like an autobiography and obviously much is from his memory but we must take him at his word that it is not an autobiography. --Tbeatty 04:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

It is definitly mostly fiction. After reading this book I have carried out research and determined only some of the framework is fact e.g. prison break and most of the rest should be taken as it is published. Fiction . I would prefer the sequel to be non fiction. --Liamjones4477 (talk) 09:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

You carried out research and determined? Please see Wikipedia:No original research. --Ezeu (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not say original research. Read it again. I have done an Hons degree and learnt to research but have not done original research here. Do you know what original research is? Its pure new research using samples etc e.g. original research includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; My stuff I used is published. Understand not many scientists or authors are doing research on Shantaram. Thats one of the points Im making. Checking fiction to find the facts is hard. Whats left? Re this Wiki page Shantaram research means an investiagtion of facts, published, printed, spoken interviews, the authors views and internet material etc that is out there for all to find, to attempt to verify a theory or position or not: In this case how much fiction vs non fiction is there re Shantaram. We all research everyday. Dont get hung up. Your views make me wonder what vested interests you have re Shantaram that referenced material is being undone by you? Personal, ecomomic political social? What. Or just pride and Ego. Which is the downside of Wikipedia --Liamjones4477 (talk) 05:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi I have removed the bit on 'Fact-based Elements' which emphatically claims the story is made up. The sources for this were unsatisfactory - nothing concrete just people's opinions on a travel forum. Roberts himself has been tight lipped about its authenticity, and I believe that by asserting its falsity without hard evidence cheapens the novel, when most of its allure lies in the conflation of fantasy and reality written and rewritten in the confines of a foreign prison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frogbert44 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GDR Shantaram.jpg

Image:GDR Shantaram.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Has Shantaram been written in any other languages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.102.0.178 (talk) 01:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Importance

Please support the raising of importance to High. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration template

I do not believe that the {{NovelsWikiProject Collaboration}} template is appropriate for the article itself, but rather the talk page. After all, readers come here to read about a given topic, not to read notices about WikiProject events. I've requested additional input at WP:VPM. —Erik (talk • contrib) 00:15, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The current consensus for WikiProject collaboration templates is for those of active collaborations to be placed on the article page, which is outlined at Wikipedia:Collaborations#Templates. Arguments for and against this practice have been discussed from time to time, but it should not be countermanded without a new consensus: Wikipedia talk:Collaborations or Wikipedia talk:Template namespace might be the best places to do this. Personally, I agree with putting the template on the article page, which can more visibly encourage editors to lend a helping hand. Having WikiProject templates in the mainspace is not unprecedented either (although clearly restricted): {{GOCEinuse}} comes to mind. Reflecting the current consensus, I've restored the template to the article space. Let me know if you have further concerns. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 01:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I won't remove the template for now, then. I'm still not sold, though... the discussion is quite old, and it strikes me as unnecessarily templating the article. Does WP:NDA not apply? Even though it is temporal like the two examples there, it still seems to break out of the perspective that the article stands on its own, that it should not be so referential, like saying, "Look at this wiki-event going on for this article!" —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Certainly agree with Liveste. Unless carefully chosen banners such as these are included it is no wonder that collaborations hardly get off the ground. It is essential to attract as many helpful editors to such improvement drives. Casual readers make collaboration worth doing -- otherwise! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Characters in Shantaram

Why is this section in the article? It is long, boring, and adds no useful information. I suggest it be zapped, or replaced with an annotated list of the main characters. HairyWombat (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

(Americanavatar (talk) 02:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)): Harywombat; YO dude! The list is there for those that want to reaearch the book, why do you bother to write when you don't care?

As I bothered to write then clearly I do care. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. What would you think if you came across such a list in another encyclopedia? How does this long, boring, unannotated list aid someone researching the book? I am sorry, but I must insist that in its present form it is unsuitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. One way to handle it would be to move it to its own sub-article (with links to and fro). HairyWombat (talk) 04:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion: I know you did a lot of research to get that list there, but it's really unnecessary. The best way to handle character lists like that is to mention the main characters in the plot summary, and more or less leave off all the others. Aside from the fact that it makes the page really long and puts unnecessary weight on characters that only show up a few times, Wikipedia is not a directory, and we're not supposed to list everything that's ever existed. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleting the list seemed a little harsh, so I have pushed it down into the subsidiary article, List of characters in Shantaram. HairyWombat (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Roman à clef

The book is described as a roman à clef in the opening line, but I'm sure that most readers have no ideas what this means without following the link. I'm not sure what the Wikipedia policy is on this, but I believe it's better to use plain English, so I've changed it to "novel based on real events (or roman à clef)". --Chriswaterguy talk 03:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Shantaram (novel). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071025053459/http://www.mumbaimirror.com:80/nmirror/mmpaper.asp to http://www.mumbaimirror.com/nmirror/mmpaper.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070515145856/http://www.scribepublications.com.au:80/news/shantarampaperbackoutofprint to http://www.scribepublications.com.au/news/shantarampaperbackoutofprint

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:34, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Shantaram (novel). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120212145517/http://www.shantaram.com/pages/interview_2.html to http://www.shantaram.com/pages/interview_2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130127215337/http://www.shantaram.com/pages/interview_4.html to http://www.shantaram.com/pages/interview_4.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 25 December 2017 (UTC)