Talk:Rama II (novel)

Novels: Sci-fi 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.
	This article is supported by Science fiction task force.

Architecture Start‑class Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"It is a much darker book, with intrigues, and many deaths. This makes it more fascinating than the original Rama book, where there was less disagreement, and the scientific wonders of the new aliens dominated."

Isn't this a rather subjective statement? Saying "Rama II" is more fascinating than "Rendevouz with Rama" due to the intrigues and deaths strikes me as an opinion, not a fact. I for one believe RWR is magnitudes more fascinating than "Rama II". I own the first 3 Rama books. I've read RWR at least 15 times (maybe more), "Rama II" 2 times and about one third of "The Garden of Rama". Wasting money on "Rama Revealed" have never been an issue. True there are more intrigue and plot in the sequels, the background of the characters more developed and most quality books/movies are driven by character disagreements. But of what use is this when the plot/intrigue is contrived, the character interaction cliched and stilted and the disagreements predictable. I'll have to get acquanted with Wiki policy and guidelines (since I've never edited a Wiki article before) before I dare take a stab at rewriting this into something more objective, so if anyone have any ideas...

It is indeed horrendously subjective. I was just thinking the exact same thinga and am going to rewrite the article now (I might adjust the stuff about reader expectations in the intro, too). As to guidelines, you seem to have an instinctive grasp of the importance of a neutral point of view, but another important guideline on Wikipedia is "Be Bold!" -- don't be afraid to get your hands dirty making articles better. Someone'll be along to fix it soon enough if you do take a wrong turn. --Bth 11:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Variance of Opinion

Perhaps someone should write about how the supporters of rendezvous with rama were divided when it came to Rama II. On the subject of it, my personal opinion is that they are two different books with their own merits, At first it was difficult to read the second book at the beginning, but I found it was better the further I got in, mainly because of finding out more about the big ship. :) --Heggy 10:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sabatini

Did she make it back to Earth? In the book it was implied she did, but in the game based off Rama 2, it was implied that the Octospiders got her. Any chance of a consensus? - NemFX (talk) 05:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notable References

One peculiar reference that stood out to me was the reference to dropping the nuclear warheads from 'Trump Tower' not yielding any damage. Why Trump Tower? It was never a notable building, in all of it's history, besides ruining Trump financially then somehow magically turning a profit. It's never been the largest anything, biggest anything, or bestest anything. So why would the author even assume it would still exist three hundred years in the future? Did everything else get destroyed and it's the last 'old world' building remaining? It's a very curious reference to a current real world item and I feel that such topical commentaries are inserted in books for a notable purpose, usually, whether I personally get the reference or not it is clearly designed so that someone would. Perhaps a notable section is in order in this article as many other novels have? And perhaps that could be an item of content for said section?

Also; if anyone has a verifiable reason as to why Trump Tower was included I would love to hear of it. @bashpr0mpt on Twitter, add me if you use it (and if you don't, you should, I'll happily send some fans your way to get you started community building, a lot of us wiki nerds use it as an easy means of conversation without the immortality of talk pages for embarrassing questions or random quips, etc. so hit me up and I'll get you started and introduce you to a heap of wiki OG's. :P) or here if you really really can't be arsed, although I reluctantly check my messages due to the amount of botspam. But it's been eating at me for years. :( BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 06:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]