Talk:La Belle Sauvage

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the La Belle Sauvage article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Novels Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Infobox - 'Followed by'

Is this book followed by Northern Lights or by The Secret Commonwealth? In other words, do we care about what follows it chronologically or in the series? Smith(talk)

Because the two trilogies are separate works, each with its own narrative line, it would be wrong to say NL follows LBL, but not wrong to say (as now) that the events of LBL are set X years before NL. Those of Sec Com X years after Amber Spyglass. Pincrete (talk) 14:51, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, how should Lyra's Oxford and Once Upon a Time in the North list their chronology? Smith(talk)

I would say they shouldn't (in the infobox) but in text state their chronological and narrative (if any) relation to the two trilogies (Lyra's Oxford is set a few years after HDM, but has little narrative relation to it and is mainly drawings, not text .... Once upon a time is mainly about the backstory of the friendship of two HDM characters). Anyone seeing proceeded/followed by is going to assume a through narrative line, which is very much NOT the case except within each trilogy. I will remove.Pincrete (talk) 11:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The play's the thing

Obviously the play didn't happen in June 2020, and won't be happening anytime soon. So I just added some copy to update. The tone sounds a little corporate now I think? Not loving it. And that one little citation is doing a whole lot of legwork. But this section is no longer eight months out of date, which is all I was really aiming for. Anyone who wants to change anything at all down there, knock yourself out.

160.19.3.249 (talk) 17:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Spoilers"

User Pincrete took issue with my reference to "spoilers" and said:

we don't avoid 'spoilers'

I think this is a broad interpretation of Wiki policies:

When including spoilers, editors should make sure that an encyclopedic purpose is being served.

But I do think the current summary, written by Pincrete, is much better than the one I truncated. It is more encyclopedic. It doesn't reveal unnecessary plot which is what I meant by "spoiler". --Óli Gneisti (talk) 15:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This was actually on the Book of Dust article rather than this one of course. I don't remember whether I actually wrote that summary or simply reinstated it, probably the second. I did feel that summarising the book was more useful than charting its place within the two trilogies. We certainly don't go out of our way to AVOID spoilers, since the entire plot from start to finish is covered in the various HDM articles and the first spoiler would be who Lyra's parents were. When looking at a film article I often consciously avoid reading beyond the first para of the plot section if I'm thinking of watching the film!Pincrete (talk) 15:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]