Jump to content

Talk:The Little Prince/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2


Why is someone trying to delete Major Theatre Performances?

Theatre performance of Little Prince is a important fact.so pls donot delete it...

  1. 1981 musical theatre adaptation entitled The Little Prince and the Aviator closed prior to its Broadway opening.
  2. French-language musical, Le Petit Prince, by composer Riccardo Cocciante, ran at the Casino de Paris from October 2002 to January 2003. Daniel Lavoie played the Pilot while Jeff Tetedoie played the Little Prince. It was revived at Shanghai Oriental Art Centre in July 2007, and in the Hong Kong Cultural Centre in January 2008
  3. Peter Joucla adapted and directed a version for Tour de Force Theatre which toured Germany between October and December 2005, produced by American Drama Group Europe.
  4. The book was adapted into a play in India, The Little Prince, adapted by Capt.Rigved and performed by Rashi Bunny , directed by Arvind Gaur
  5. The book was adapted into a play, The Little Prince, adapted and directed by Anthony Clark, with music by Mark Vibrans. It was first performed at Contact Theatre in Manchester in 1986, and revived at Hampstead Theatre, December 2008 - January 2009. 59.177.14.122 (talk) 11:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC))
Your allegation I removed content on "major theatre performances", such as Riccardo Cocciante's, is unequivocally wrong. It was never removed. You'd know this, if you had read the section where you repeatedly insert your text.
I wrote the section it appears in. It was me who added references to the part where that appears. In fact, virtually all the adaptations you list are already covered in the article or its subarticles. Only two, long ago removed during cleanup were not, an uncited local/regional short-run non-significant British performance, and the only play you are genuinely interested in inserting: an unreferenced unexemplary one (wo)man play in India.
It's clear that's your real intention, not because your IP resolves to Delhi, India, but because you singled out that production alone to mention in multiple sections of the article. The others you list as a mere smokescreen, having copypasted from an earlier version before I'd contributed to this article (here) with its almost a hundred supposed culture references. You've done this from multiple IP addresses (or, as one resolves elsewhere, may've recruited others), undoing my last reversion with the default message despite the warning displayed it's only to be used for vandalism. Afterward you made a series of edits (7) inserting whitespace and carriage returns, changing paragraphs into multiple standalone sentences; puzzling at first, it's apparent that was a clumsy attempt to make it difficult to revert your changes, as their effect was to disable the Undo function due to conflicting edits. Naturally, the article can only amply illustrate their breadth of countries and languages related to the novella by a small selection, which it accomplishes with Japan, Korea, N. America, China, Russia, Argentina, the Congo, and elsewhere. It is not biased against or for any area.
In summary, you've repeatedly added unreferenced information about regional/lower significance production(s), through a variety of IP addresses, employing ploys and misinformation as described. –Whitehorse1 03:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for reply.I am not trying to insert any lower significance or regional information.Hindi is a major langauge of world. If some one performed it in India, then we should welcome & accept it as a major event.I love this book from my childhood.It was a great one man show directed by Eminent Indian theatre director Arvind Gaur . Rashi Bunny already did many shows in different cities of India. thats why i try to insert it many times.I thought it is major information.In my knowledge it is the first solo performance of this book in world.If posible pls mention it in "List of The Little Prince adaptations".Thanks again. -- 59.177.11.133 (talk) 08:37, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. I didn't suggest India or its languages are of low significance, I referred only to the play. I think India is a beautiful country. English is a major world language, but the fifth item in your list above still only ran at a couple've regional theatres, and failed to last longer than a month in at least one of those, which is why that wasn't included either. Many of us here love the book. With it translated into over 180 languages, with productions in many of those, it's just not possible to list them all. Some of the example adaptations in the main article won significant awards or ran on multiple continents. If you can, please provide a reliable source explaining why that production is particularly significant (e.g. won notable awards, or outstanding critical acclaim), that'd increase the likelihood of it remaining. Thanks. –Whitehorse1 03:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Plot vs Interpretation

The plot section contain a lot of analysis, and no references at all. Can we keep the plot section clear of any interpretations and put all of those ideas (with hope, referenced ideas) in a separate section? The majority of this reads like an essay. ViniTheHat (talk) 13:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

The Little Prince in different languages

Is it necessary for a whole section of the article to be devoted to the the book's title in other languages? I'm very tempted to delete it all. Alex.liu064 (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Also it is stated in the beginning of this article that the book was translated into more than 250 languages... including braille. Braille is not a language, it's a script. You can write in any language that uses latin alphabet using braille. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.37.86.65 (talk) 03:30, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The real asteroid B-612

Is the place where the rose was born: Consuelo was salvadorean, the B-612 asteroid is El Salvador, a tiny country (or asteroid for Exupery) with various volcanoes, is very interesting how the description of the asteroid fits the geographical description of the country. What do you think? comment added by Elcer (talk) 22:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

It's interesting. But since this is Wikipedia, a source is needed if you want this in the article. The Stick Man (talk) 23:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok, since all this is speculations and interpretations of a poetic work, and after a little research, there is an author (Jorge Carrol, Argentina) who wrote a book called "La antigua Guatemala es el Asteroide B 612 donde nació el Principito" (here's the index card of the library of Universidad del Itsmo in Guatemala), because there are three volcanoes near the Antigua city, called: Volcán de Agua (extinguished), Volcán de Fuego (active) and Acatenango (active). However, acording to the salvadorean author Manlio Argueta, Consuelo was from a town called Armenia, near three volcanoes called: Izalco (active), Quetzaltepec (active) and Cerro Verde (extinguished). See this article about Mr. Carrol book and the blog of Mr. Argueta for refences (in spanish only). Here's a photo of the three volcanoes (Izalco, Cerro Verde and Quezaltepec) -> http://www.panoramio.com/photo/421485

Elcer (talk) 19:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow, this is good info! Except... I'm not a Spanish speaker, and Google Translate is doing these articles justice. Could you or somebody else put those in? Inspiration is where I'd put this. The Stick Man (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Information on the cgi based series is needed

i dont have much information due to the fact that it just started airing in my country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

The following material at bottom may be WP:OR, or possibly misinformation, as Saint-Ex's Guatemala crash occurred on February 15, 1938 (Schiff, 1996. pp. 293-295), a period during which he likely had no intention of writing a children's book as he hadn't yet had any encouragement from Elizabeth Reynal, who only offerred it in June 1942 (Schiff, 1996. pp. 278 378 ). Due to the large disparity in timing I'm removing all references to the Guatemalan volcano being an inspiration to Saint-Ex, plus any references to him having started work on the novel in hospital there, since the crash occurred in 1938, not 1941. If anyone can elaborate on these discrepancies with accurate cites from reliable sources, please do so on this Talk page. HarryZilber (talk) 19:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

[start of material removed ]

  • While flying in Central America he crashed at the capital of Guatemala in November 1941 and spend several weeks recovering in hospital there.-->
  • {#tag:ref|It is understood that some references in his book The Little Prince came from a trip to Central America at the end of 1941, in November 1941 he suffered a crash landing while flying to the city of Antigua Guatemala, the old colonial capital of Guatemala and the vice-kingdom of Central America during the Spanish rule. Saint-Exupery sustained injuries during the crash which required his hospitalization in the National Hospital of Antigua Guatemala. The hospital records show that Saint-Exupery suffered "Broken bones and head injuries" which required him to stay for three weeks in the hospital. It is believed he started his work The Little Prince while in hospital, and the references to the volcano in his book were inspired by Agua Volcano which overlooks the hospital and would have been a landmark which he would have seen from his hospital bed.|group="N"}
  • One source states that he started his work on the novella while recovering in hospital from his crash in Guatemala in late 1941.

[end of material removed ]

Léon Werth

It's hard to believe that Léon Werth, to whom the book is dedicated, isn't mentioned in the article. I believe that should be corrected. Ostalocutanje (talk) 20:18, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Duplication of material on the inspiration for the Prince

There is quite a bit of duplication between the description of the inspiration for the prince character in "Inspirations" and in "Novella's creation", although the citations are different. Putting this content in the Inspirations section would be consistent with its title and the other characters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KeithC (talk • contribs) 21:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

File:StEXStatueBellecourL.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:StEXStatueBellecourL.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:StEXStatueBellecourL.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Use of an original Little Prince drawing in Illustration section

It would be of great benefit to include one of the original drawings from the novella into the section on illustrations; however since the drawings were copyrighted in the U.S. in 1943 (and renewed about 1971) they appear not to be in the public domain in the U.S. (unlike many other countries), where WP's servers are located.

Can anyone develop a fair use rational to allow the inclusion of a drawing? The drawings themselves are easily downloadable from many websites, including a webpage in China noted in the external links section. HarryZilber (talk) 16:07, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Little Prince Dnipro.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Little Prince Dnipro.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests May 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Little Prince Dnipro.JPG)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Mort pour la France

This is the English Wikipedia; we shouldn't add French-language tags to things. Furthermore, it's a "French civil code designation applied by the French Government"; i.e. it's a provincial tag that applies to a small part of the world. If you want to say it "will not fall out of copyright status for an extra 30 years in France", then write a copyright section, and we can mention how it's currently out of copyright in much of the world and has three years left in the rest of Europe and 27 in the US. It doesn't even say how long copyright normally is in France. It's a narrow fact that if it has a place in the article, it's not the lead and it's with similar facts on the copyright status elsewhere in the world.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Number of copies sold disputed: source not verfiable

I checked this source: Inman, William H. (2011) "Hotelier Saint-Exupery's Princely Instincts", Institutional Investor, March 2011. Retrieved online from General OneFile, 6 November 2011 (subscription))

and found that there ist no article named "Hotelier Saint-Exupery's Princely Instincts" at "institutionalinvestor.com". Check it out yourself ->here: institutionalinvestor.com "Hotelier Saint-Exupery's Princely Instincts".

By the way The Independent wrote in September 2010 that the total number of sold copies is circa 80 million. So where does this gigantic increase of sold copies come from? I think "institutionalinvestor.com" isn't a reliable source whereas the article in The Independent titled "The Little Prince' Graphic Novel To Be Published in English" is a online verifiable source and The Independent is a well-known British newspaper. Sorry, but I will change the figure back to 80 million copies.--Eusc (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi Eusc, this will take a little patience to unravel; please bear with this post.
  1. The source quoted earlier, Institutional Investor, actually has the article behind their paywall, as shown here. I'm not sure why their search box couldn't bring it up, but Google found it on my first try. If you look at the earlier citation, it was originally retrieved from the online database Gale Cengage which is why I didn't see that issue previously. Quoting from that article, "...The Prince remains a king among books, with more than 200 million copies sold in more than 190 languages, making it one of the bestselling volumes of any kind". The article's author, William H. Inman, used to be a reporter for United Press International, which would tend to make him a reliable source.
  2. While you are now quoting the Independent from September 2010, the Independent was actually quoting figures going back much further. A very quick Google check found the 80 million figure being used multiple times at least back to January 2006 by European Schoolbooks, as shown on their webpage here, which quotes "...Saint-Exupery's book has been translated into over 180 languages and sold over 80 million copies."
  3. However the book is being marketed (licensed) aggressively by its copyright holder, or their agents, which is Saint-Exupery's estate I believe. I've seen several articles referring to this, as the sale of the novella in new languages and new markets (countries) is generating new revenues to the estate to fund their foundation, activities, grants, salaries, etc... worldwide. Another reason for their push to expand sales is that the book's copyright will be expiring around 2025 (if I understand the U.S. and France's copyright law correctly). After that copyright expiration their remittances from St-Ex's creative works will essentially fall to zero, so it makes sense for them to market his books aggressively while there are still a dozen years or so left. As stated in this article, and others, there are approximately 50 derivative translations of the work in South Korea, and likely 60+ or so derivative translations published in P.R. of China. While S. Korea has a modest market of about 50M people, China's is a staggering 1.3+ billion. My guess it that the bulk of significant new sales of The Little Prince are being generated in countries like China plus also India and Russia, which have populations of over 1.2 billion and 143 million (St.-Ex. is modestly still known in Russia, where he was a correspondent).
  4. Returning to the issue of reliable sources to support what sales figures should be provided to this article, here are just a few of the estimates that appear online from a Google search:
  • (March 2001, at TheLittlePrince.com a probably reliable source) referring only to audio/video copies of The Little Prince --not printed copies-- "An estimated 80 million audio and video products have been sold worldwide." Further down on the same webpage, but in 2003, in reference to the printed novella, it states "....the book has been translated into over 236 languages, and over 130 million copies have been sold worldwide".
  • (March 2007, at Reviewing Books and Movies, a weak source) "80 million copies around the world and has been translated into 160"
  • (May 2012, at New York Daily News, a reliable source) "..“The Little Prince” has sold 140 million copies worldwide and is the world’s second most translated book behind the Bible".
  • (May 2012, at by the Associate Press via the Times Tribune), "sold 140 million copies, in about 260 languages. After The Bible, "The Little Prince" is the most translated book in history, according to the Paris-based Saint-Exupery Foundation."
  • (October 2012, at Book-fair.com, a probably reliable source) "The Little Prince... is the most translated non-religious title in the world, with editions in 267 languages. Some 150m copies have been sold, there are 400m readers worldwide and more copies are being sold every year, according to Olivier d’Agay Director of the Saint-Exupery-d’Agay Estate".
  • (November 2012, at Word Ho Chi Minh City.com, a weak source), " the Little Prince has been translated into 210 languages and dialects, and has sold over 150 million copies".
And there are probably many more figures available if you have the time to go thru trade journals and other sources that aren't online. What we have, very quickly from the above, are estimates between 2007 thru to the near-end of 2012, ranging from 80M up to 150M printed copies sold. The number of translated languages and dialects of 260+ is likely very accurate since there are multiple collectors and databases around the world that will probably support that figure.
In terms of the total numbers sold, I suspect that Inman may have looked at the figures from 2001/2003 (shown up above with TheLittlePrince.com) and then combined the sales figures for both printed copies and audio/video copies (80M + 130M), which is more than the 200M number he gave (quoted above). If not, then he may have been able to compile current world wide figures, probably not an impossible task given his lengthy career in journalism going back to the 1980s.
The 80M figure is clearly dating back to the beginning of 2006 and is too low. Dozens of languages and many dozens of translated editions were added since then. Multiple online sources (not included above) are quoting sales at 140M throughout 2012, probably taken from a Saint-Exupery website. That said, I suspect the real figure of printed copies is actually towards the higher side of 200M, since, I hate to say it, some publishers might have an economic interest in under-reporting their sales figures to lower possible royalty payments. I recommend we revise the lede's second paragraph to read:
...or alternately "selling over a million copies per year with sales in various media totaling up to 200 million copies worldwide...", since the recordings are essentially audible versions of the book. And then provide several references with a foot note precisely explaining the sentence. A third version would be to go with the largest group of news sources and say ".... selling over a million copies per year with sales totaling more than 140 million copies". And revise it if and when a newer reliable source is found. That's my 2¢ worth of lengthy opinion. Wheew. HarryZilber (talk) 03:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
US copyright law is dissimilar from France's; The Little Prince and other books of its age will leave copyright 95 years after they were published, so the French book and first English translations will leave copyright in 2039 in the US, with later translations following in later days.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for that. I believe the copyright in France will be (50+30) 80 years after death, or possibly after its first publication in 1946, so either 2025 or 2027. I'm sure there's probably a website somewhere that can confirm what the correct figures are. More importantly, what choice would you recommend for the number of copies sold to be used in the lede: a) 140-200M, b) up to 200M or c) more than 140M. It seems that the 200M figure is an outlier which may include the audio/video copies which don't if fact count for "best-selling book" figures, but its a question of interpretation. In Inman's article he didn't, if fact, used the word "book" (saying "...making it one of the bestselling volumes"), so his writing was somewhat ambiguous and may have included the non-printed adaptations. I have no objections to either of the three figures provide the right wording is used. Comments? HarryZilber (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Update: the article's lede has now been revised to reflect the most reliable book sales figure discussed from above, i.e. 140M as per the AP–TimesTribune source. A footnote has also been added reflected the 80M audio-video copies sold as per the Saint-Exupery Foundation webpage at thelittleprince.com. HarryZilber (talk) 01:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

hhh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.160.114 (talk) 04:40, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

"As handwritten"

I removed a note from the infobox giving the French title as: "Le Petit Prince (as handwritten)", because I cannot see any possible meaning for the "handwritten". It was added in the course of some genuine editing by @Harryzilber at Revision as of 2013-01-13T11:04:07, while the picture was the same. If anyone can see any meaning, please explain, and perhaps it can be restored with a clarifying note. (FWIW: the capitalisation is the same as the French title according to fr:WP; there is no picture of the french edition at fr:WP) Imaginatorium (talk) 06:44, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Question of wording

Is it intended to repeat the word "martial" in the phrase "racked with periods of severe stress, martial and marital strife". If so, please explain this usage. Thanks SteveOak (talk) 16:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 16 external links on The Little Prince. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 19:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Not the literal translation of "L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux"

I have seen many bastardizations of both sentences. Here, "On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur," is translated correctly, "One sees clearly only with the heart," The next line, "L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux," is a very simple French sentence, "The essential is invisible to the eye." Period. Not, "What is essential," the word "what" does not appear in French in this sentence. If he wanted to write it that way, he would've wrote, "Ce qui est essentiel est invisible pour les yeux." Please remove it, and translate it correctly, I do not want to touch your work. Perhaps it's not as flowery or poetic as the sentence that's there now, but there is absolutely no leeway or doubt here. Pookerella (talk) 13:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

 Done. I put in your suggested "eye" because of poetic flow, despite les yeux translating to "eyes" (plural). Heart is singular, so a singular eye works nicely. Binksternet (talk) 14:51, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The concept of "eye," as opposed to the literal translation of "les yeux," is one we use all the time. It's an artistic concept, one that doesn't attribute the actual physical attribute, but what is translated by the brain. Thank you, even though you didn't change the key point! :) I suppose it sounds strange to an American ear the other way? Too brusque? Unfortunately, that is the way the French speak; while it sounds beautiful and can be translated romantically, the French tend to focus on "what" is said rather than "how." Anyone who speaks to French people speaking English knows this all too well, they are very literal and succinct. Pookerella (talk) 17:34, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on The Little Prince. 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, 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) 04:39, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Greta Garbo connection?

I've read that The Little Prince was written, at least partly, in a house formerly owned by Greta Garbo, but can't find much about this. Is there any substance to this? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 11:12, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on The Little Prince. 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, 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) 05:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Baobab - in popular culture

Hi, I've added an "in popular culture" entry to the Baobab article, but another user keeps deleting it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adansonia&type=revision&diff=821616665&oldid=821515990

There is ample coverage of the relationship between these 2 topics, and the Baobab article is already linked to from the The Little Prince.

I've added a new section to the talk page of the Baobab article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adansonia#in_popular_culture

Would you please be able to comment there? I'd like to know if people think it's a good idea to keep that section or that user is right to delete it. I wouldn't want to break any rules.

Thanks!

DrVogel (talk) 22:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Any thoughts? DrVogel (talk) 23:32, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Little Prince. 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, 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) 13:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

chapters six seven and eight

- six in order to make his escape, I believe he took advantage of a immigration of wild birds. pg(25)

- seven he happened to be in a vicinity of asteroids 325,326,327,328,329 and 330. so he began by visiting them to keep himself busy and to learn something from them. pg(27) - eight The second planet was inhabited by a very vain man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellvue2019 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Little_Prince/Archive_2&oldid=1240615766"