Talk:Eagle Strike

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This redirect 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
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I'm cutting the redirect so work can start on the article. Minglex 18:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not. Minglex 19:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tenses

shouldn't encyclopedia articles be past tense?Teh tennisman 21:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. 141.156.14.34 00:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except that: "Works of fiction are generally considered to "come alive" when read. They exist in a kind of perpetual present tense, regardless of when the fictional action is supposed to take place relative to "now". Thus, generally you should write about fiction using the present tense, not the past tense." See Wikipedia:Writing better articles.

Robina Fox (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

Why has a major part of the article been deleted. Can someone please revert it back to a time when there is a large amount of text to do with the plot (I have checked and there was a major plot section) Samaster1991 21:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We don't really need a bunch of side information on this article. We need to add more things about the book, apart from its plot. Suggestions: History, References, Awards... --haha169 21:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is there no notability?

This is a pretty popular book, and many people read it. It's not like Harry Potter, but I think it deserves a slot on Wikipedia.

yes, but nothing to give evidence or proof of that - where is the verifiability. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mister Funny

Somebody added some POV and humorous, yet inappropriate for Wikipedia phrases. I think I removed them all, but some I may have missed. Can somebody check this out? 216.209.175.136 (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"MySpace" section

To whomever added the information-less (as well as pointless) section on MySpace...why? If there is something completely unimportant and unrelated to the article, don't add it! It's really that simple. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.199.160 (talk) 00:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Summary"

Please, whoever added the book cover-style blurb of the book, you really shouldn't have.

To everyone, please DO NOT replace a legitimate summary with something that sounds like an ad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.199.160 (talk) 05:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]