Talk:Nineteen Eighty-Four

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former good article nomineeNineteen Eighty-Four was a Language and literature good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 1, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
November 13, 2013Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Plot summary in lead section[edit]

Greetings, everyone!

I hope you are well. First of all, I'm no expert on George Orwell or 1984, but after finishing the book yesterday and then coming to check out Wikipedia's article, I noticed the entire plot is set down in the lead section. It is a wonderfully written plot outline, but I think it's out of place being in the lead. Many people just read the lead section of an article to get a rough idea of a topic (well, that's what I sometimes or often do), and the complete plot outline there is bound to be a heavy spoiler.

I'm not sure if I'll be able to rewrite it (it's a tough job summing things up), but if I have time, I'll give it some thought to try and summarise the story as fits a lead.

Thanks! GeoffreyA (talk) 12:47, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

The lede is supposed to summarise the entire article, but having read it, you're right and it's way too detailed. References aren't supposed to be used either really, but this one constantly refers to the novel itself. Unless somebody beats me to it - such as yourself, I may also hack & slash later. Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, we don't do spoiler warnings so that's not a great concern - see WP:SPOILER. Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks; I think I'm going to give it a try. GeoffreyA (talk) 08:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Here are the older versions of the plot, in the lead, that I managed to dig out from the revision history. I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do, digging these up and setting them down here; but my idea is to look at the older versions and, guided by those, revise the present one.

[October 2017, but even older versions seem alike. I looked up till November 2016 today, so before that, I'm not sure.] The tyranny is ostensibly overseen by Big Brother, the Party leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality, but who may not even exist. The Party "seeks power entirely for its own sake. It is not interested in the good of others; it is interested solely in power." The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a member of the Outer Party, who works for the Ministry of Truth (or Minitrue in Newspeak), which is responsible for propaganda and historical revisionism. His job is to rewrite past newspaper articles, so that the historical record always supports the party line. The instructions that the workers receive portray the corrections as fixing misquotations and never as what they really are: forgeries and falsifications. A large part of the Ministry also actively destroys all documents that have not been edited and do not contain the revisions; in this way, no proof exists that the government is lying. Smith is a diligent and skillful worker but secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion against Big Brother. The heroine of the novel, Julia, is based on Orwell's second wife, Sonia Orwell.

[November 2017] The tyranny is ostensibly overseen by Big Brother, the Party leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality, but who may not even exist. The Party "seeks power entirely for its own sake. It is not interested in the good of others; it is interested solely in power." The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a member of the Outer Party, who works for the Ministry of Truth, or Minitrue in Newspeak. The Minitrue is responsible for propaganda and historical revisionism. His job is to rewrite past newspaper articles, so that the historical record always supports the Party line. The workers are told they are correcting misquotations, when in actuality, they are writing false information as truth. The Minitrue also destroys all documents that have not been edited ; in this way, there is no proof that the government is lying. Smith is a diligent and skillful worker, but he secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion against Big Brother. / The heroine of the novel, Julia, is based on Orwell's second wife, Sonia Orwell.

[November 2017] The tyranny is ostensibly overseen by Big Brother, the Party leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality, but who may not even exist. The Party "seeks power entirely for its own sake. It is not interested in the good of others; it is interested solely in power." The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a member of the Outer Party, who works for the Ministry of Truth, or Minitrue in Newspeak. The Minitrue is responsible for propaganda and historical revisionism. His job is to rewrite past newspaper articles, so that the historical record always supports the Party line. The workers are told they are correcting misquotations, when in actuality, they are writing false information as truth. The Minitrue also destroys all documents that have not been edited; in this way, there is no proof that the government is lying. Smith is a diligent and skillful worker, but he secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion against Big Brother. Smith's love interest and heroine of the novel, Julia, is based on Orwell's second wife, Sonia Orwell. Smith's attempts at self-education and rebellion are ultimately quashed when he is arrested by O'Brien of the Ministry of Love (or Miniluv), which is tasked with arresting and torturing dissidents and is forced into the horror chamber Room 101.

[Present version, May 2018] The tyranny is ostensibly overseen by a mysterious leader known as Big Brother, who enjoys an intense cult of personality. The Party "seeks power entirely for its own sake. It is not interested in the good of others; it is interested solely in power." The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a member of the Outer Party, who works for the Ministry of Truth, or Minitrue in Newspeak. Minitrue is responsible for propaganda and historical revisionism. Smith's job is to rewrite past newspaper articles, so the historical record always supports the Party's agenda. The workers are told they are correcting misquotations, when they are actually writing false information in the place of fact. Minitrue also destroys all previous editions of revised work. This method ensures there is no proof of government interference. Smith is a diligent and skillful worker, but he secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion against Big Brother. Smith begins his acts of rebellion by starting a sexual relationship with Julia, an employee from the Fiction Department at Minitrue. He received a book from O'Brien, a member of the Inner Party and fellow rebel, that details the truth behind the Party's actions. Smith's attempts at self-education and rebellion are ultimately quashed when he is arrested by O'Brien himself. Smith discovers that O'Brien was truly working for the Ministry of Love (Miniluv), the ministry in charge of torturing dissidents. Smith is subjected to many forms of torture and is forced into the horror chamber known only as Room 101. There he is tortured by his worst fear, rats, and is forced to betray Julia. He is released from Miniluv, and Orwell describes his life after his release for the rest of the book. Smith ends the story observing a military update on the telescreen and feeling an intense love for Big Brother.

So there are the outlines from the leads. GeoffreyA (talk) 08:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

It's all too much. The lede summary should be no more than a couple of sentences:

Winston Smith is a member of the Outer Party, part of the political organisation that ruthlessly governs England, now known as Airstrip One. The Party is itself ruled by the enigmatic Big Brother. Smith secretly hates and reviles the party, but can see no way of taking action until he meets Julia, a young woman with whom he begins an affair. Together they intend to join the resistance - they believe a local cell is run by O'Brien a prominent member of the Inner Party. Smith documents his sedition via a diary, which is in itself an act of rebellion against the Party.

Something like that. If readers want to know more - there's an entire article below the lede which will tell them everything. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Good morning! I actually only saw your comments just now. I've been revising the summary this morning and made some progress. But I think your version is quite good. Excellent summary of 1984 in a few sentences! And you're right: the article's version is too long. I also made sure I removed all mention of O'Brien because those were heavy spoilers. I know Wikipedia doesn't care about spoilers, but still. I read 1984 for the first time this past week and it was a shock to see that O'Brien had tricked Winston. I never guessed it. GeoffreyA (talk) 10:29, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Another thing. The article's version says Winston beginning a relationship with Julia was his first act of rebellion, well, more or less it says that. Wasn't his writing in the diary his first act of rebellion? Also, I think your reading above concerning O'Brien is quite a good one: it doesn't give away too much, and it has the same atmosphere that O'Brien possessed through the earlier parts of the book. You know, the mysterious and admirable leader supposedly associated with the resistance. GeoffreyA (talk) 11:01, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
If we're being really pedantic then the purchase of the diary in the first act of rebellion - but yes, the diary comes before Julia. I know the point you're making, because I think I inadvertently created the ambiguity here. Feel free to change. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:15, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. My brain is beginning to flag for today. I was looking at the lead section a little while ago, but I give up for now. Your version is quite good (as well as plain and clear), but I'm not sure how to combine it with the present version (or I'm just lazy right now). GeoffreyA (talk) 14:02, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 28 May 2018[edit]

 

The following is a closed 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: Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) In Memoriam A.H.H.What, you egg?. 12:50, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Nineteen Eighty-Four1984WP:COMMONNAME, and a quick Google search for '1984' brings up only the book; not the year. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC also applies here. Thanks. In Memoriam A.H.H.What, you egg?. 22:41, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose. The book is very notable, but it can't possibly come close to the notability of an entire year. A Google search just for 1984 outright probably means the book, sure, but usage of 1984 in a sentence is going to usually be the year. And while I'm not much for "consistency" arguments, if somehow this was seen as close, the fact that all numbers > 200 and less than 2050 or so are about the year is an additional point against this. SnowFire (talk) 01:28, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The primary topic of "1984" is the year, not the book which is based on a dystopian future set in that year. We could consider 1984 (book) but I don't think that's any better. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:43, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Move to 1984 (novel) - 1984 per WP:COMMONNAME and (novel) per WP:BOOKDAB. To demonstrate common name, here is a Google Ngram showing usage over time. The peaks track closely (matching peaks of popularity of the book), showing that this is an accurate comparison and that the numerical version is more common. Please keep in mind the impact that a move may have on related topics Adaptations of Nineteen Eighty-Four, Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984 film), Nineteen Eighty-Four (UK TV programme), Nineteen Eighty-Four in popular media. -- Netoholic @ 04:13, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose the book is named after the year. (well actually named after 1948) but either way the year is Primary. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:22, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per above arguments. Besides, whilst the first couple of pages from a Google search are about the book, to say "only the book" is misleading, and not the case. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:17, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose In addition to the points raised above, it would interfere with the naming of the year articles, because they would have to go "1983, 1984 (year), 1985, 1986..." Anywikiuser (talk) 08:19, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per all the above. The PRIMARYTOPIC of 1984 is the year (obviously), which trumps all other references. The first edition of the book was as Nineteen Eighty-Four, and while some editions have been published as 1984, there are still versions published under the Nineteen Eighty-Four title (as well as 1984). My 'quick Google search' of 1984 shows several references to the book, but it's mixed in with many other things; a search for "Nineteen Eighty-Four" shows 95 returns for the book in the first 100 hits. - SchroCat (talk) 10:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

I have decided to withdraw. Due to the comments made by other editors. And, the fact that the actual year is more notable than the book. Thus, renaming it wouldn't be beneficial. Thank you. In Memoriam A.H.H.What, you egg?. 12:53, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

New Section[edit]

Hi, I am thinking about adding a new section that addresses 1984's impact on schools and students. This book is commonly included in English curriculums; however, there are different contexts in how this book is taught and how this book is received (including banning the book from schools) Though.ts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icf17 (talkcontribs) 22:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

plot[edit]

at the end of the book doesn't winston get shot? that should be in the plot section — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.102.187.139 (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

No, he doesn't Bkatcher (talk) 21:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)