Talk:Moonrise (novel)

Major events

I think the section 'Other' should be named something different. Perhaps 'Major events' would work. I will change it tomorrow if no one objects to this. Shrewpelt (talk) 13:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

yea sure we can do that Leafpoolrules (talk) 22:55, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

GA Passed

This article has passed the GA noms. It is well balanced and well-cited to show factual accuracy. The next steps would be to expand the reception, and development sections. If you feel that this review was in error feel free to take this article to WP:GA/R. Thanks. Tarret ^talk 21:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

FA possibility?

Does anyone want to try to see if this article can be made an FA candidate? We could request a peer review and see if there's anything that is clearly missing, and then, when that's done, give it a try as an FAC. Personally, I think the more novel FAs there are, the better for everyone, and this is already at GA class. John Carter (talk) 19:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll put in a peer review request after I check with the main contributors. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Probably all that needs to be done is the expansion of some of the sections and copyediting. After that, it could reach FA. Shrewpelt (talk) 13:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a long way from FA, and probably barely GA standard. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

A prescient warning. The article has now been delisted. Geometry guy 21:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes I agree that this article is far from FA, but it's possible. I'll help any way I can. In fact I'm possibly about to do some major editing on it. But what I think would be more representitive of the Warriors series would be to make Into the Wild and/or the main Warriors article an FA. Melkittycat (talk) 00:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Clean-up

I added punctuation and fixed the plot. Come visit me! (talk) 19:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

That's what we need! BTW, welcome to WikiProject Warriors! PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 18:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Come visit me! (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You know, I can't find any Plot. Ian 04:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian.bjorn (talk • contribs)

At Wikipedia, we strive to keep only important plot details, leaving behind all the trivial details. So right now, there is only plot. Derild4921☼ 19:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I split the Synopsis into 2 parts, which are Previous book and Plot. That should make it easier for people like me to get to the Plot and not just all of it. I did it to prevent confusion. Ian (talk) 20:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Ian, that explanation should go in the box labelled "edit summary" which is right above the save page button and minor edit checkbox. Brambleclawx 20:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It's gone! My good edit is gone! Look at my contributions, it says it in the summary! Awww..... Oh, well. I'll need someone to be on my side. Ian (talk) 08:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I fixed up some grammatical errors :) Ratkinzluver33 (talk) 04:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Repetition!

I think that they talk about the 9/11 attacks influence a little too often. Don't get me wrong, I want the idea in there, but there are multiple sections that pretty much talk about the same thing. I have no editing skills (haha) so could someone please, please, please, edit those sections or remove them? Thank you so much in advance! Ratkinzluver33 (talk) 04:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. I'll think about it, but both section are legit. (it's only two sections, "Inspirations and influences" & "Themes") PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 16:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. I looked at it again and just merged the two. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 16:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Characters section?

This article ought to have a characters section. The problem is, we need to decide what makes a character count as important in each book. For example: does Brambleclaw need to be described because he's one of the journeying cats? Or is he not important enough in this particular book to count? Feathertail seems to be a shoo-in, but other than that, I think everything else can be rather hard to determine. Maybe its best to draw up some guideline now. Brambleclawx 15:07, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I would say you could legitimately have each of the journeying cats and Crowpaw. All of the journeying cats have significance, so I don't really think anyone could question that. It's been awhile, so I don't really remember which other characters would be significant. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 20:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Brambleclaw, Squirrelpaw, Feathertail, Stormfur, Tawnypelt, Crowpaw. I'm thinking that Midnight would be important as well. I'd probably say no to Purdy, but Stoneteller may be important. Brook might be important (I can't remember when Stormfur fell in love with her, maybe that was Dawn). Sharpclaw probably, but most of the Tribe is not important. Hm... and maybe Leafpaw, seeing as she's one of the "narrator"s. Brambleclawx 02:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I think, as said before, all journeying cats would be important. Also, we could set a "rule of thumb" so to speak of any cat that, if not present, the story would not make sense. Also, certain alternate names for cats should not be included. For example, Firestar's original name was Rusty I think. That could mentioned in his section, but not in the main header. If you know what I'm saying. I'm Flightx52 and I approve this message 03:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

My first comment would be that while I think there would be a valid reason for a characters section in the first book of the series, in this case Warriors: The New Prophecy, I am not sure that having a detailed section discussing the characters and their behaavior in each individual book would be necessary, and could conceivably violate WP:PLOT. Of course, characters which appear only or first in this book might be best included here, but, even then, we would have to ensure that the degree of detail doesn't go to the point of violating WP:PLOT. Taking all that into account, I think it would be useful to know which particular characters are being considered for inclusion in this proposed list section, and what material is considered for inclusion. John Carter (talk) 15:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I currently plan to write a short description of Brambleclaw, Squirrelpaw, Feathertail, Stormfur, Crowpaw, Tawnypelt, Midnight, Sharptooth, and Stoneteller. If anyone else has any suggestions, please tell me. Brambleclawx 01:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

John Carter, I thoroughly read through WP:PLOT and I'm not quite sure what portion of it you're referring to. If you could direct me to the exact part of the policy, it would be great. Thanks! I'm Flightx52 and I approve this message 02:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Basically, the first point. A character list pretty much by definition has to describe the character, and, in works of fiction, those descriptions often involve material which qualifies as plot summary. Having such additional plot-related material about individual characters, in addition to an overall plot summary, could very easily result in excessive description of the plot in the same single article.

I am currently reading this book and I see the use of a character section. I think the cats Brambleclawx mentioned fit in the character section. Also I agree with what Flightx29 is saying about if the story doesn't make sense without a certain cat that cat should be included Nyswimmer (talk) 16:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

As a strictly personal opinion, I think that it might make sense if the descriptions of the characters are comparatively short to include them in the summary of the plot. I guess my reason for saying this is at least in part based on the fact that, as of yet, these characters have no existence outside the scope of these books, and, in many cases, of this individual series within the broader series of books. Descriptions of the characteristics of the characters, such as, for instance, cowardice, courage, arrogance, mouthiness, or whatever, might be different, of course. But, based on what I've seen, I have no objections to the characters Brambleclaw mentions being described at some weight somewhere in the article. John Carter (talk) 17:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, John, I agree with what you've said so far. It could result in excessive plot summary, so I've written fairly short descriptions for each character, and linked as well to the individual character's section too. I've limited the descriptions here to what I see as most important to an understanding of the novel. If you like, you can give me some feedback on what I've written so far. Brambleclawx 18:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the inordinate delay, but it looks good so far. John Carter (talk) 17:02, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Questions whilst copyediting

On User: Brambleclawx's request, I have been slowly copyediting this article. Sorry about the hit-and-miss nature of it; unfortunately, that's the way my life is. Some questions and issues have come up that need more than I can address with a copyedit, and I've placed them below.

• I've looked at the sources more closely, and I'm afraid that I agree with what other editors have said about some of them, specifically the chats. You say that it contains information that can't be gotten elsewhere. Wikipedia policy states that if you can't find information in a reliable source, then it shouldn't be put into a WP article. It's too difficult to find the information you use in the chats, amongst all the fluff and goofiness that's a part of any chat. But others have said similar things, so I won't repeat all that here. Chats are simply not reliable sources, sorry, and there's just no way to get past it. You might be able to find an editor to look past them and pass this article in a GAC, but I can promise you it won't be in FAC ten minutes before an editor there rejects it based on just this one thing. There are plenty of excellent articles in WP that don't pass as a GA or FA because of sourcing issues, though, and there's nothing wrong with it. If getting this and other Warriors articles to GA is important to you, though, I suggest that you remove all the information you get from the chats, or at least relegate them to a note, and wait and see if the information shows up in a more reliable source. Again, I'm sorry; I'm sure this disappoints you.
  • Done. You can take another quick look to see if there's anything that needs to fixed after this change: in particular, I notice that Inspiration and Influences is now a one paragraph section... Brambleclawx 14:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Thank you, well done. I loved your edit summary; yes, I know that these things are painful, but believe me, it's for the best. You should be able to get this article passed at GAC now. Christine (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
• "Collectively known as 'the Erins' in "Publication history and writing": *All* the "Erins" like this writer? Really? If so, that's very interesting, and for me, brings up the question, Is liking the author a requirement to write the series? Believe it or not, it's a serious question--actually, a chicken and the egg kind. Did the writers like this author before writing their books, or afterwards, as they became familiar with the genre? Actually, it also brings up another question: What was the criteria for choosing authors for the series? Is there any way you can find out?
  • It seems at least Victoria Holmes and Cherith Baldry like it. I could probably find whether or not Kate Cary likes it, but it would probably have to be a statement from her own blog. But no, picking Erin Hunters didn't have to do with liking the series. On Kate Cary's blog's FAQ, it mentions that she'd sent in writing samples to the publisher and they liked it... something like that. But I think this information fits better in Erin Hunter, not here. Brambleclawx 14:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Yah, you're probably right--about the EH article. Christine (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
• Characters: I wonder if the list should be structured differently. Currently, the characters are listed alphabetically, like all Character lists. What do you think about listing them by order of importance? Just a suggestion; it's up to you if you want to follow it.
  • To list them in importance-order might be seen as POV, I think. Peoples' opinions on which character was most important likely vary. Brambleclawx 14:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Again, you're right, of course. Christine (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
• You keep saying, "[This character] who chosen to represent..." That's very redundant, and we haven't been told who Midnight is yet. Later on, you name the cats chosen to go on the quest, though. Therefore, I don't think you even need to mention that. You do, however, need to say what clans they are from. How about using this kind of format: "Brambleclaw, a dark brown tabby tom warrior with amber eyes from Thunderclan, is the son of Tigerstar and Goldenflower, and brother of Tawnypelt." I'll let you make those changes if you agree with my suggestion. Done.
• Speaking of Feathertail: "She becomes increasingly close to Crowpaw..." You already state that these cats become close, so I'd cut that phrase if I were you. Question: Do they become close in the course of this book, or have they already been so?
  • I think they started becoming closer in Book 1, which is why I used "increasingly" to imply that they were already somewhat close. Brambleclawx 14:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
• About Midnight: "...It is implied that she did this knowing the Tribe's prophecy." Which prophecy--the one about Feathertail's death? If so you could say, "...it is implied that she did this knowing the Tribe's prophecy regarding Feathertail's death." Done.
• Setting: In order to follow my "No section should have a single paragraph" rule (which isn't really a WP policy; as I said above, it's my personal preference), I would put it in with the "Plot" section and rename it "Setting and plot." This is totally up to you, though.
  • Will fix. Brambleclawx 14:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Christine (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Nice job. Like I said above, with the sourcing issue, this article, with the changes suggested by the reviewer, has more potential to pass GAC now, especially with the sourcing issues resolved. It was very fun reading about the series; it's exactly the kind of book I probably would've liked as a kid. Christine (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. And of course, that's why I'm editing: to improve coverage, and allow others to discover Warriors. Brambleclawx 22:49, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Moonrise (novel). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090507183039/http://www.timeforkids.com:80/TFK/kids/news/story/0,28277,1895268,00.html to http://www.timeforkids.com/TFK/kids/news/story/0,28277,1895268,00.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)