Jump to content

Talk:The Hunger Games (novel)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gentlejackjones (talk | contribs) at 16:42, 24 August 2016 (Question about Source No. 51 (blog "listicle")). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleThe Hunger Games (novel) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 14, 2013.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 1, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
April 23, 2012Good article nomineeListed
September 20, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Controversial with parents

The article has this sentence: "However, the novel has also been controversial with parents;[46] it ranked in fifth place on the American Library Association's list of frequently challenged books for 2010, with "unsuited to age group" and "violence" being among the reasons cited.[47]" Reference 46 is not useful. In supporting the sentence "controversial with parents" we have one New Hampshire mother who hasn't read the book and is completely ignorant of the plot aside from the fact that some kids kill each other. I contend that the entire sentence would be better supported by reference 47 only. Lara 21:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. We have clear consensus that this novel is not the primary topic of the name compared to other uses. Creating a broad-concept article as a broad-concept article at the base name has been suggested; this will probably be the best way to go moving forward. Cúchullain t/c 14:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


–The title The Hunger Games could as easily refer to the film, the film series, or the novel series. Charles Essie (talk) 00:41, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Hunger Games (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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 05:39, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle Royale

A discussion has been started of the need/desirability of including the content of this section in The Hunger Games (about the series) and Suzanne Collins (the author's page) as well as in this article. Please leave any discussion on this subject at Talk:The Hunger Games#Inclusion of Battle Royale similarities on this page, the author's page, and the novel's page. Meters (talk) 02:26, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Content and location of Section of Battle Royale

  1. This topic was originally covered in a subsection of the Critical Reception section. The subsection header was removed by User:DHeyward here. Now it has been moved to its own section. Does the material warrant a section? Note that the material currently in this section is no longer exactly what it was.
  2. A positive quote on the issue "The Hunger Games has an entirely different set of cultural baggage ... Collins just happened to tap in to the creative collective consciousness, drawing on ideas that have played out many times before, in addition to her intentional reference to Greek mythology." by filmmaker Robert Nishimura on IndiWire's PressPlay [1] has been removed [2] on the basis that it is a blog. The contributor of that commentary is listed as contributor to the page http://blogs.indiewire.com/pressplay/contributor_bios so he's not just some no-name blogger, or a member of the public commenting on a blog. It seems like a legitimate source to be included to me. Other opinions? Meters (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No. We don't have "plagiarism" sections. And two sentences don't need a section. It may be notable here in the book article (debatable). Definitely not acceptable in the article on the author. --DHeyward (talk) 04:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After some long reflection, I think the Cinemablend.com source (No. 51) is inappropriate and should be deleted from the article. It's one of those "Top 5 reasons that ...." blog "listicles," and I don't think it adds to the journalistic integrity of the article-- in fact, it detracts from it. Thoughts? Gentlejackjones (talk) 16:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Gentlejackjones[reply]