Talk:Annapurna (book)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Nepal Low‑importance

	Nepal portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Redirect

All the info appears to be in the Maurice Herzog article. thoughts on redirect? --Stormbay (talk) 17:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the book is notable enough that it deserves its own article. It is considered a classic of mountaineering literature well over half a century later. Jim Heaphy (talk) 04:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are no references here which substantiate the claim that the book is notable in its own right, so I've marked it for merge. -- Mikeblas (talk) 16:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added references. This is an important book. If anything material from the Herzog article, about the book, should be merged to here, and a "Main article" sectional top hat added to Herzog's section about the book. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

While I believe the book is noteworthy in its own right, there is not a whole lot to say about it that cannot be said on the Herzog page. I have added to the material there. SUPPORT merge into Herzog. Ratagonia (talk) 07:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a huge amount that could be added yet. For example a "Summary" of the expedition as described in the book. Information on the books reception from contemporary reviews. Information on book awards and the books influence on other climbers/readers. A list of the climbers involved with summary information about them. etc.. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I'd like to know some more about the controversies. Are they minor descrepancies, like who was at camp 2 on a given day, or are they more substantial and likely to cause us to have a different opinion about Herzog and his leadership of this expedition? Wschart (talk). —Preceding undated comment added 16:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discrepancies are important. On Herzog's account he was the driving force and hero of the expedition. On the account of the other's present he was a megalomanic whose reaction to adversity was weak and pathetic. Crucially, on his version, he nonchalantly drove his summit-partner on despite protest; while his summit partner's version is that he did not. But Herzog had the book rights, and his version held sway unchallenged for decades. Adam Brink (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Annapurna (book). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100328034824/http://www.nationalgeographic.com:80/adventure/0404/adventure_books_1-19.html to http://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/0404/adventure_books_1-19.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 19:25, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]