Talk:The Owl Service

Turning a short article into one-sentence sections?

I'm not at all convinced that the very wholesale splitting of a couple of paragraphs into a series of sub-sections -- some of which have no content whatsoever -- has really enhanced this article. Until more content is added, I think this article might be better as it was, and I'm very strongly tempted to just turn it back to what it was. Am I on my own here? --Telsa (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

It is meant to be a spur to other editors to enhance this article and bring it up in quality to a full Novel article. Otherwise it will always remain a poor stub. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Owl servicePB 1973.jpg

Image:Owl servicePB 1973.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 this Wikipedia article 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 05:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, the fair use rationale remains inadequate. The documentation is poor in other respects, eg what is the source? --P64 (talk) 00:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Release date

The article (and category) states this as a 1967 book, but in the box text, it states 1968. Which is correct? I've always understood it to be 1967. --Tuzapicabit (talk) 19:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Resolved

1967

The reported hardcover date (June 1968) and publisher (RH Children's Books) may refer to one thing or may be mistaken. LCCatalog (Garner point of entry) gives first U.S. edition 1968, H. Z. Walck [1].

P.S. We use publication dates.

Among other things I have revised {infobox} heavily by ref WorldCat, ISFDB, LCC (without formal references) and essentially replaced 1968/73/96 editions with the first edition (Collins 1967) and the depicted Collins 1973 paperback as noted. --ISBN for the latter because the former predates ISBN(?) --P64 (talk) 00:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

TV Version

I think it's time that the TV adaptation was given its own page, it's certainly notable enough, while the Novel is notable enough to be on its own. Anyone else agree?
Hopefully with the new DVD release, there will be some interest generated to do this. If not, I'll make a start.
I think on the importance scale - both Novel and TV should be mid-importance rather than Low - they're much more worthy than that in many respects.--82.0.207.86 (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Done!--Tuzapicabit (talk) 15:06, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Illustrations

Is the book (at least in its first edition) illustrated by a single drawing: the owl service design by Griselda Greaves? Does it appear on endpapers alone? These guesses interpret external link "Images"[2] and a sibling page[3]. --P64 (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Garner on use of Wales research and Welsh language

Google Books provides [4] [5] these two consecutive paragraphs from page 199 of Margaret Meek, et al., The Cool Web: the pattern of children's reading (Bodley Head, 1977).

The second par was used here (quoting as underscored and paraphrasing further), and the book was cited with accessdate=2009- but no URL.

(quoting Garner) Welsh political and economic history; Welsh law; these were the main areas of research. Nothing may show in the book, but I feel compelled to know everything before I can move. This is a weakness, not a strength.

  I learnt Welsh in order not to use it. Through the language it is possible to reach the mind of a people, but just as important seemed the avoidance of the superficial in characterization – the Come you here, bach school of writing. Presented with such a sentence, we know that the speaker is Welsh. We may guess that the author knows Welsh, especially if he inserts from time to time a gratuitous, and untranslated, line of the language. We can admire the author's erudition: but we do not experience what it is to be Welsh. This is reality laid on with a trowel, and it remains external and false.

(to be continued) --P64 (talk) 19:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC) {{underconstruction}} Garner, Alan (1977). in Margaret Meek, Aidan Warlow, and Griselda Barton (eds.) (ed.). The Cool Web: The Pattern of Children's Reading. The Bodley Head. pp. 199–200. ISBN 0-370-10863-9. Retrieved 2009-01-12. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link) {{clarify|date=September 2013|reason=This does quote Garner. Is he the author of a chapter in the book?}

restore format Retrieved YMD over User:Ohconfucius abuse of MOS:NUM

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Owl_Service&diff=572350950&oldid=556924261 edit breaks uniform YYYY-MM-DD perhaps because some retrieved dates are manual (not accessdate parameters).

If so, what title? Or does the book merely quote him at length? At Google Books I find two paragraphs quoted and paraphrased here does not provide the context needed.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Owl Service. 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/20110820004427/http://alangarner.atspace.org/owls.html to http://alangarner.atspace.org/owls.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) 21:49, 11 December 2017 (UTC)