Talk:Barbara Hambly

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

The Emancipator's Wife[edit]

Hambly writes in the first sentence of the book's afterword, "The Emancipator's Wife is a work of fiction", so I've taken the liberty of changing the category to "historical fiction". Cactus Wren 00:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I would tend to agree. I think it is well placed--Mystar 18:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


That was two months ago, if you or no-one else has changed it, there's no reason to reply. If you think it's incorrectly placed, move it. And I'll move it back, providing links which back me up. Incidentally, I moved Search the Seven Hills because it's classified as a historical ficiton novel by Amazon.com WLU 12:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Themes[edit]

Please understand using the proper syntax/ words is appropriate, even if you didn't place it. “Hambly has a penchant for genre-twisting characters” is an opinion of the person you are citing as a review, please note it is not a professional, nor peer review, but a reader review and again it is an opinion which makes the “ is said to have” not only appropriate but nessary, if you are going to keep the opinion and link. Secondly, “She also tends towards” in not proper grammar, and people do not use that syntax to speak. The fact that the reviewer thinks she offers up “rich descriptions and vivid characters is great, but improperly worded. SO I fixed it. Simply reverting my editing for the sake that it is not yours goes against Wiki policy. Please follow proper Wiki protocols. --Mystar 19:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Reverting for help --Mystar 19:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the reference to Hambley capturing the voices of Luke and Leia. The cited websites are not objective (The Callista fansite?) and are out of touch with the general consensus of Star Wars fans. Hambley's books are, in fact, generally reviled in the Star Wars fan community, and were stated as the worst of the EU in a Star Wars universe guide. --Unregistered —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.194.194 (talk) 21:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Over All Editing[edit]

Previous occupations include a high-school teacher, a model, a waitress, a technical editor, an all-night liquor store clerk, and a karate instructor, occupations that she felt allowed her time to write.[2]

Factual and accurate “She searched for a job that would allow her time to write”.

Since she searched for a job that would allow her time to write, she wasn't looking for something she felt allowed her time to write. She chose jobs that allowed her time to write. 20:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Also “She attended University of California at Riverside, specializing in Medieval History and eventually earning a masters degree in 1975. She also spent time in Bordeaux, France as part of her studies”.

Is a very awkward wording, sounding like a run-on sentence structure. A better sentence structure is

” Hambly attended the University of California at Riverside in 1975, where she earned her Masters in Medieval History. As part of her studies, Hambly also spent a year in Bordeaux, France”.

It not only flows smoother but allows the reader to understand not only the significance of why she was in France, but the distinction between the two. Having the year 1975 at the end is proper formatting and gives the reader a time frame for what occurred. Keep in mind what occurred is the significant information followed by the not so significant dating of the time frame.

Incorrect. She did not attend UC@R in 1975, she graduated in 1975, spending time in France as part of her studies. There is no time frame for her attending school, only for when she graduated. An MA takes more than a year to complete, therefore we don't know when she started. Graduated in 1975 is the correct information. The text is reverted and modified to reflect this.20:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

“Particularly cited was her work within the Star Wars universe, where she was praised for her spot-on character "voices", concise and rich in dialogue[7].”

Were you to take notice no where in the interview does it read Luke and Leah, it reads “spot-on character "voices", with no distinction on the specific character [s].

This is plagiarism if you do not put it in quotations, the use of spot-on is a direct lift from the website and the statement made does not justify the use of a quotation. I've added a second reference which supports her work particularly with Leia. This justifies isolating these characters specifically.

Wikipedia is an encyclepidic work, not the place for inflecting personal thoughts on what you want it to say, when the material doesn’t say it. Please keep in mind the Wikiepidia Help page for futrue editing help. This could help in eliminating future mistakes of content. I hope I've been helpful in your learning proccess--Mystar 18:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Again WLU, you need make sure you only add factual and accurate information. The referenced article gives no specifics as to a person [s] i.e. Luke or Leah. So you cannot place that as fact. I have quotes and referenced what was stated. Also offering an authors opinion who who's voice she captured is also POV and not allowable. The reference and quote is a good one. You simply wish to own the page. I think we can compromise here. I'll allow your poorly worded part above. However you edit warring does no one any good, especially Wikipedia. This is not your personal blog, and not your website. From reading your talk page I think you are taking this way to far. If your health is now suffering, I think you need to relay. dudette life is way too short to allow stuff like this rule you. I've just been having a blast editing and correcting misinformation and making sure factual and accurate info is placed and cited. I get a good chuckle each time I see much needed editing help. People are such Whiners! --Mystar 03:37, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Your request for a peer review is absurd - this is an article about a minor fantasy author who isn't particularly well-known. That there is so little editing despite the sparseness of information shows not that many people are interested. Just you and me apparently.

Leia, not Leah. Both references include specific mention of Luke and Leia, and one of them refer to Han as well. A quote from one: "One of your greatest strengths in your writing has been your vivid characterizations. This showed clearly in your accurate portrayals of the "familiar" characters like Luke, Leia, and Han (thank you, thank you for getting Luke's and Leia's personalities "right"!!)" This is a quote from the interviewer, not Barbara Hambly. You are incorrect. The other reference is also not by the author, it's a review of the book from a Star Wars resource site. The inclusion of the quotation is unneeded, and when both of the references is included, having a single quotation is confusing. Your 'poorly worded' jab I'm ignoring - the wording did need a bit of tweaking, which I did with my verison. And since the rest of your entry is another attempt at condescension, I'm just ignoring it.

What do you mean by relay? Also, you have only been 'having a blast' editing two pages - Barbara Hambly and the Cat's Claw, incidentally two of the reasons why I think you are wikistalking. You have added incorrect, plagiarized information on both pages, so it really looks like you are having a blast trying to piss me off. Since joining the SoT Wikiproject you've also done jack on that, which makes me believe that somehow, an author you have never read is more imortant than your BFF Terry Goodkind's works, and that you've suddenly developed an interest in herbal remedies that also supercedes your previously all-consuming interest in TG. WLU 12:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever wrote the nice long bit on the Benjamin January novels might want to move it to, or at least add it to, the page I made for the series. Tamtrible (talk) 16:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

screenwriter[edit]

The article says she is a screenwriter. What films or TV shows did she write? Nitpyck (talk) 01:18, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Barbara Hambly. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:11, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Barbara Hambly. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Barbara_Hambly&oldid=1204082006"