Talk:1985 (Burgess novel)

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.

Other 1985 Book

I followed this link from the 1984 page expecting to find the 1985 book by György Dalos. Anyway, I wasn't sure what to do, if anything, about it. I do have a copy of it somewhere.Woland37 18:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move the page?

Shouldn't this page be moved to 1985 (book) or something similar? I realise that Nineteen Eighty-Four is published under both the numerical and alphabetical title, but as far as I know this book isn't.--James Kemp 20:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

personally don't mind - "1985" does seem the usual name, I would only say I would prefer 1985 (novel). :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 10:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I considered using 1985 (novel), but only half of the text is a novel; the first half is a critique of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Sorry to be so pedantic, I'm just pre-empting complaints regarding the page move! --James Kemp 13:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The title of the book is 1985 (numer not alpha). Why are we mis-"spelling" it? Garrick92 11:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to 1985 (novel); I realise this isn't completely a novel, but as the article starts with 1985 is a novel by English writer Anthony Burgess and it's listed in Category:English novels, it probably should use the more conventional (novel) disambiguation rather than (book). 1985 (novel) is better than Nineteen Eighty-Five anyway. Masaruemoto 17:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The story's ending, not vandalism

Do not rv my final sentence of the plot. Read the book and confirm that it is the ending of the novella. It is not a slam against Muslims, but the actual ending of the novella half of 1985. Why write the plot if you won't write the ending? struggle 16:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AnthonyBurgess 1985.jpg

Image:AnthonyBurgess 1985.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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failure of prediction

Of course, the union domination trend he predicted was almost immediately derailed by the rise of Thatcherism... AnonMoos (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft Carrier

Towards the end of the book, the king mentions that an Aircraft Carrier is off the coast of the UK and it does not belong to the Arabs, or IRA. The King states it is a country in which America has many financial interests. Has it ever been clarified as to what state this is? 171.65.238.130 (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]