Talk:The Polish Rider (novel)

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

references

Hello Boleyn, all the best in New Year. It looks you have tagged my entry as unreferenced. Indeed, I have provided no references. However, the entry consists of 2 sections: the plot and major characters. Could you please advise what sort of references you expect for such sections? Should I quote Muñoz Molina's novel when discussing twists and turns of the plot or characteristics of the protagonists? Regards, --Unsereveranstaltungen (talk) 12:53, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unsereveranstaltungen, good question. You can use the book itself as a reference. Generally, for every bit of information you add, it should have by it a citation showing where you got your information (see WP:UNSOURCED and Help:Referencing for beginners for more information). Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 19:43, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boleyn, many thanks for your response and suggestion. As far as I can see, none of the guidelines you linked deals with referring in detail the content of a novel, which to me seems to be a rather peculiar case in terms of referencing. I would typically expect to have referenced the informations I have placed in the lead ("narrative is non-linear", "novel is viewed as multi-genre exercise", "it is usually viewed as a discourse upon relationship between identity and memory" etc), which normally should point to authors of such opinions. However, referencing the plot and the characters by pointing to appropriate pages of the novel itself appears a bit cumbersome to me, especially that you suggest that "every bit of information you add" is referenced. I have done a brief exercise by referencing "every bit of information" in case of one episodic character, which is mentioned in the novel perhaps not more that 10 times, "colonel Bilbao" - please could you have a look what the result is. Would you suggest that the tag is removed only once all the characters and all the twist-and-turns of the plot are referenced the same way? regards, --Unsereveranstaltungen (talk) 11:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unsereveranstaltungen, unless there is a specific guideline, articles follow the general guidelines. I have removed the unref tag as it now has a source clearly given, and I replaced it with a 'primary source' tag. It's not got good sourcing, but it is a start. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boleyn, thanks for your help and your effort to improve the entry. I would be grateful for your opinion re the following: given the article refers the plot of briefly lists the characters, I wonder how these sections could be anchored in "non-primary source" references. Do you think there is a book or an article (except 5-sentence marketing stuff you might find in e-bookstores) which provides a summary of the plot and characteristics of the protagonists? I doubt that anyone has ever written anything like this and hence, I doubt whether the "plot" and "main characters" sections can be referenced by pointing to secondary sources. Regards, --Unsereveranstaltungen (talk) 20:12, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Unsereverstaltungen. I did a quick Google though I think the best sources will be in Spanish. I found sources like this [1] and several here [2] which could probably verify some of the information in the plot and characters sections. There will be some, but not necessarily much. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 07:04, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boleyn thanks for your continuous support. Have added some secondary source notes - does it look any better now? Does it still merit the "too much of primary sources" tag? If yes, what else (how many more footnotes) is needed to get it removed? Btw, do you know how to make the entry title in italics? I have tried but the result I get is crap, regards, --Unsereveranstaltungen (talk) 15:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Unsereveranstaltungen, I didn't know how to make the title italic but have now found out. I've removed the primary sources tag; it's much better now. Thanks for all your work on this, Boleyn (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boleyn, many thanks! --Unsereveranstaltungen (talk) 21:29, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]