Jump to content

Talk:Jonathan Green (speculative fiction writer)

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

Ad tag

[edit]

I have removed the advertisement tag. The article isn't particularly well written but it doesn't read like an advert. (EvilRedEye 16:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The removed

[edit]

I took out this section as it just reads as WP:OR (and is harming the quality of the article):

-- Green's books are reputed to be among the most difficult in Fighting Fantasy due to the frequent inclusion of high-level adversaries and because there is often little room for error. For instance, Bloodbones features a final battle against a Skill 12 Stamina 24 adversary while suffering a -1 Attack Strength penalty (a player starts with maximum scores of 12 and 24 respectively), Knights of Doom includes four Skill 12 adversaries, Curse of the Mummy features a Skill 13 Stamina 25 final adversary and Spellbreaker includes a Skill 12 bandit and another Skill 12 final adversary. Reviewers agree that Knights of Doom is one of the hardest of the original Fighting Fantasy series, while Curse of the Mummy is termed "ludicrous" in difficulty by one reviewer and "ridiculously difficult... as with Jonathan Green's two other gamebooks" by another, and Bloodbones is termed "insanely difficult" by one reader.[citation needed] Spellbreaker includes several passages where a certain dice roll (such as 1-3 out of 6) is necessary for survival and has been estimated as having only an 8% success chance prior to factoring in risks from combat[citation needed], other statistics, item choice and so on. Although usually raised as a criticism, this aspect also pleases some readers.[citation needed] The books are also often credited with atmospheric writing and originality.[citation needed] Upon their 2007 rereleases Spellbreaker and Curse of the Mummy were edited to make them more playable. --

If you can reliably source it and polish it up then feel free to rework it, but don't just hammer it back in. (Emperor (talk) 14:55, 28 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Interviews

[edit]

I've probably done enough to get the article to "stick" this time and have added the interviews from the better sources but I turned up a lot more that might prove useful in sourcing statements:

Feel free to use what you like. I'll do a little more fiddling and then toddle off. I'll probably sweep back through at some point in the future but it still needs more work and they are a starter. (Emperor (talk) 19:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Jonathan Green (writer). 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: 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) 21:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and references

[edit]

This article is of questionable notability. Not so non-notable I felt a {{notability}} tag was warranted, but close. The problem is that all current sources are of low quality (blogs, interviews, online fan mags): the article doesn't really succeed in establishing rock-solid notability. The fact it is so expansive doesn't help: it reads as borderline WP:FANCRUFT. Unless notability can be more clearly established a much smaller stub article would be expected for such an obscure writer, where we only include those works that the few sources actually discuss. CapnZapp (talk) 13:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jonathan_Green_(speculative_fiction_writer)&oldid=1202450282"