Talk:The Ruins of Gorlan

The Ruins of Gorlan received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Novels: Fantasy / Australia Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian literature.

Children's literature Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's 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.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Australia: Literature Low‑importance

	Australia portal The Ruins of Gorlan is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian literature (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Its an awesome book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.17.68.26 (talk) 01:35, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Movie rumor?

Now, I haven't heard anything about this new movie, and while that doesn't mean it isn't happening, the way the "movie rumor" section of the article just sounds to me like someone who started the rumor, and is trying to cover it up. I have therefore removed it from the article. Gherking 02:42, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a movie, as you will find out in the article.DarkJak495 : Chat 12:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Rangers Apprentice.jpg

Image:Rangers Apprentice.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

I agree with Wikipedia. The plot is to long. It gives away most of the story, but I guess that is ok. But there is to many minor things that are in the Plot, and they shouldn't be there. I think that it should be edited, to make it shorter, and more to the major events. What do you think?DarkJak495 (talk) 16:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The plot is definitely too long. There is nothing wrong with giving away the story; this is an encyclopedia, so it's not our problem if we have "spoilers". The best thing is to remove everything but the main points, trimming the plot to approximately 400-500 words, but keeping all of the important information. Feel free to begin shortening it yourself, and I will try to help where I can. Welcome to Wikipedia, and keep up the great work! PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 17:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The plot for this article is exactly 623 words long. I have spent a good amount of time editing it, and I think that the plot is going to stay like that for a while. Does anyone agree or disagree. If you think there is anything else to fix, mention it here. Cheeers!DarkJak495 (talk) 13:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I would suggest also expanding to other topics that are useful to readers, such as publication history, themes, and critical reception (there should be some somewhere). For some help on figuring out what is appropriate see WP:MOS (novels). If you need help, feel free to contact me here, Sadads (talk) 13:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - The plot is much better. Great work! Probably some of the explanations at the beginning could be shortened still, but it's out of critical territory. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 19:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I took your advice PrincessofLlyr. I shortened the explanations at the beginning of the plot. The plot is now 563 words. And Sadads, I will take your advice and expand the article.DarkJak495 (talk) 12:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, I think we should find some reviews of the book by some more reputable or editorially controlled organizations, such as http://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/childrens-books/john-flanagan/the-rangers-apprentice/ or http://www.kidsreads.com/reviews/0142406635.asp . Then using WP:Summary style summarize the various discussions which the review bring up in a Critical Reception section, and if they talk about themes or style of the book, in Themes or Style sections. Make sure you add footnotes using the syntax <ref> REFERENCE TEXT</ref> . I would suggest enabling WP:RefTools and using that to insert the footnotes. From there, we may also want to figure out the publication information, which Amazon or Barnes and Noble websites may be able to help with. If you have more questions, feel free to leave a comment here, and PrincessofLlyr or I will respond, Sadads (talk) 13:52, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to take a look how this is done at some of our higher quality articles such as Seekers (novel series) or Warriors (novel series) which provide good examples on how to approach popular children's and young adult literature, Sadads (talk) 14:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was just thinking about polishing up this article for GA, would you like to collaborate? Derild 49 21 ☼ 20:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean me, then yes, I would love to collabrate with you. Oh, and who or what is GA? DarkJak495 (talk) 20:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, it means GA review, check out the link and look at the requirements. GA = Good article, its a type of review of articles we use here on Wikipedia to check for quality and completeness. Don't worry their are alot of confusing acronyms that are very Wikipedian, you will figure them out, just stick around :) Sadads (talk) 20:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah sorry about that, I've gotten used to throwing around acronyms thinking everyone knows them! :) I've shortened the plot down to a better size though it might need a copyedit for grammar and flow. I usually do that after all the information is added in. At this stage, try and find some interviews on the web that has information on how Flanagan got the original idea for the novel and any problems he may have had while writing it. If you have a public library with literary databases, it would be helpful to search up some reviews, I've already found a handful and will add them in soon. Derild 49 21 ☼ 21:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I've removed the information about the Camp from this page since it is concerns the series as a whole, not just the first book. In an individual book article, only information about the one book should be added. Derild 49 21 ☼ 21:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its okay about the acroynms. I am a new person at Wikipedia, and I am learning. I added the stuff about the movie and the awards. How is that? DarkJak495 : Chat 21:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its great, but do you know what website you that information from? We need to add a citation to those sections. Derild 49 21 ☼ 21:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A friend gave it to me, but if you look at www.awardsruinsofgorlan.com or something like that, you can verify it. Then add it to the reference list and/or external links. By the way, how do you like my new signiture? DarkJak495 : Chat 21:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I'll need to do some searching for those awards. I must say, I've seen that style signature used by quite some other users. Did you take it from someone or figure it out yourself? Derild 49 21 ☼ 22:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like the signature, but for future reference, try to keep things related more directly to users on their respective talkpage and content discussion on the respective content page.

Otherwise, I am glad you guys are having some success finding sources, and look forward to the future improvement. If anything is behind a paywall, I will probably have access to it, so feel free to contact me, and we can see if I can find it and use it :) Sadads (talk) 01:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome job guys! It looks terrific. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sadads, would you please give this article a read over, and also consider the bellow. Thank you, UserDarkJak495 talk orange 17:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have near hit my Wikipedia quota for the last week, in doing contributions and whatnot, I need to work on some real life stuff. I will be back on sometime later this weekend, maybe I will take a look then. For right now, I will let PrincessofLyr and Derild take care of things, Sadads (talk) 17:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Things that need to be done

There are still many ways to make this article better. If you are looking for something to do, you should look at the list below and see if you can do one of the things.

punctuation check
grammar and spelling check
adding more references
adding more external links
checking to see the information in the article is reliable

If you have any suggestions on something else that needs to be done, please feel free to add it to the list. Happy editing! UserDarkJak495 talk orange 13:34, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rearranging

As it is I think this article has too many sections. You could merge the "Awards" section with "Critical reception", and merge "Audiobook adaptation" with the rather paltry (at the moment!) "Movie" section. Even if this article greatly expands, I would still opt for using subsections, rather than allowing each topic to have its own full section. Oh and PS: I copy edited the whole thing, as per the request made of the Guild of Copy Editors... Let me know if you have any major qualms and happy editing! Bobnorwal (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Could the North American cover be added, along with the Australian one? -- Billybob2002 (talk) 21:12, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There has since been some updates on the film

As of 2022 a film or television show is highly unlikely 155.93.128.207 (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORUM. Unless you have sources? SSSB (talk) 16:07, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]