Talk:Into the Wild (novel)

Cover

The official Warriors website uses that image featured in the center of the cover as their picture of Firestar. So we actually have proof for this one. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 01:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

That's still original research to say that A looks like B so therefore A=B. Metros 12:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you mean that the picture that is used on the website is not the exact picture used in the article and so we cannot assume that both the pictures are reffering to the same cat?  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 12:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Even if it was the same exact picture, it's still original research until you get someone like the cover designer to state in an article in a magazine or something that "Yes, the image on the cover is _____ during _____." Frankly, what the hell does it matter? Seriously, if it's so damn obvious that it's that cat and you think I'm a moron for not seeing that, then why in the hell wouldn't anyone else know that that's the cat and not need you to state that in the article? Really, what is the point of it being needed to be stated in our article here? I don't see any other book series or novels that state what is on the cover of the book, so why do we need it if it's so blatantly obvious in your opinions? Metros 12:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Well if that's your argument, why don't you go and remove all obvious information from the entire wikipedia ^DAVID _CAT 23:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you think it doesn't matter, why don't you stop complaining ^DAVID _CAT 12:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

If you read what I said, I said why the hell do you people care so much about putting it in there? What good does it provide for these articles? Metros 12:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I offeneded you, but I do agree that it is a kinda stupid thing to be arguing about and that it should stop.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 12:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, if it's a silly thing to be arguing about, why don't you stop arguing and let us keep the information^DAVID _CAT 23:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I quote from the tag at the top of Wikipedia:Reliable sources:

This page is considered a content guideline on Wikipedia. It is generally accepted among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this page's talk page. Common sense says that the cats are the same^DAVID _CAT 23:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, and I see Metros' point, and still think it's a stupid thing to argue about. I really do think that common sense would tell you that the cat's are the same, but all content in an encyclopedia is supposed to verifiable. I really don't know a solution to this problem.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 03:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

ok, the book (in fact the entire series) has rusty as the main character. the OFFICIAL WEBSITE of the series has a section on the main characters. it uses the same identical picture from the cover as a picture of rusty. so the picture on the cover is of rusty, no one could come to a different conclusion.^DAVID _CAT 13:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Whatever! Even if it's OBVIOUS, just leave it there. It won't do anyone harm, right? IceUnshattered (talk) 00:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes

Where it talks about the prolouge and mentions the prophecy it says that 'this fire turns out to be Rusty, a housecat' I really see no point in that being there because 1) Nowhere in the first book does anyone come out and say that Rusty/Firepaw is the fire that will save their clan. 2) Even Bluestar isn't sure of the fact 3) It doesn't even MENTION Rusty in the prolouge amd 4) It should be obvious to the reader anyway. I removed that line. If anyone has objections we can talk it out and put it back in, possibly in a different spot.

Also I added which Erin Hunter wrote the book. ClawClaw 19:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that, ClawClaw. IceUnshattered (talk) 00:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Warriorsbook1.jpg

Image:Warriorsbook1.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 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 23:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 2008.03.07.

I rewrote the article to give it more encyclopedic value. Please remember that this article is meant to present the book mainly to people who never heard about it before. Consequently, there is no need to enumerate dozens of names, to present the plot in an in-universe style, to present non-relevant details, and to use words and expressions that are not understood by those who did not read the books. Remember, the article was nominated for deletion because of these flaws. Yrtgm (talk) 16:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)