Talk:Giles Milton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
WikiProject Literature (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


The article would be improved if the list of titles by Milton were not linked and were given bibliographic details.

The publication details of White gold are: Publisher: Hodder & Stoughton

Date of publication: 2004

ISBN 0-340-79469-0

We also need to know Giles Milton's Date of Birth and education etc.

Vernon White 19:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Critical acclaim sections[edit]

Glad to see the work that has gone into expanding this piece about this excellent British writer. The only problem I see with the piece, as it now stands (and it is greatly improved), is the separate section of 'critical acclaim' on each book. This seems a bit awkward to me. Far better would be a list of each work and a description (and there is now), and then one section on critical acclaim. I find it a distraction to have several sections devoted to critical acclaim. MarmadukePercy (talk) 17:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The whole article - and especially the "critical acclaim" section - looks to me distastefully like promotional material. This is the kind of thing publishers slap on the back of popular histories. A sentence or two on Milton's standing as a writer of popular historical works would be more than adequate. Links can be provided to reviews in newspapers and magazines rather than quoting excerpts from them. It is not - I understand - the business of Wikipedia to advertise books on behalf of writers or publishers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


I did an extensive general copyed 1/. "historian" inappropriate for writer of popular boos who is not a scholar. 2/ Removed excessive use of his name & book titles. 3/The existing article is first of all highly promotional, and written in a style that would normally indicate his major works are intended for children--I am rewritinjg in more mature English. 4/ More work to go. DGG ( talk ) 01:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


This article is a tad bit too long and could use some judicious pruning. TuckerResearch (talk) 13:41, 4 September 2018 (UTC)