Talk:List of zombie novels

Suggested Inclusions
Castle Roogna by Piers Anthony is the first of many Xanth novels to prominently feature Zombies. Is there any reason these would be excluded? Dennis M. Myers (talk) 15:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I Am Legend should be included. JoelDick (talk) 03:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Table format
I know that the way the table is set up so that when you click on a part of the TOC it will go to the beginning of that letter, but for those letters that have nothing listed under them, it makes the table look bad with the random darkers lines appearing. Is there another way to format the table to avoid that? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 17:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Rename
Since its not just novels that are listed here how about renaming the aritcle "List of zombie fiction"? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 15:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Removed to talk
Due to the ongoing AFD, I removing books which I can not readily find sources for.

The Reason to Remove?
Have you looked on Google, Amazon, etc., lately? Many are listed and I actually even have several of the physical books in my possession that were in fact published by numerous authors.

Are they being removed because they are not current in publication, not "worthy" of some sort of definition of such, or mistakenly removed because the editor thought they were never published?

Criteria
This list should contain novels that have their own articles, could have their own articles per WP:NOTE (refs should be included), or where the author is a notable author with their own article. Please discuss. Verbal chat  14:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If there is no further discussion or opposition, I will start removing all entries without a blue internal link. Verbal chat  16:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Silence means nothing, hold on. I will take care of it, taking the extra step of looking for references for each book. Instead of deleting the contributions of a lot of editors, I will move the information here. Notability is not based upon whether there is a blue link. Notability is based on references. I welcome your assistance is finding references.
 * Why spend time on the article when you would like it deleted and made into a category? once these books who have no references are removed, would you considering changing your !vote please. Ikip (talk) 01:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you please restore the links I added at the very least? Unless this article only contains notable books or books by notable authors, and by that I mean ones with wikipedia articles, then my not vote will stay as delete. There's only a few days left to convince me to change my mind, and adding indidvidual references (that fail WP:GNG) isn't helping. Verbal chat  07:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, I didn't see that you added links. I will restore them then unwatch this article, as I trust your judgment on this article. Ikip (talk) 14:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Here is the last version including non notables: old article. Please restore any that have articles (book or author). Thanks. Verbal chat  07:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * (refactored) Verbal, I am really confused, this statement does not exist in policy:
 * "Note several fixes to tabe to. Please reintroduce after starting articles on books or authors, or adding blue links"
 * If these articles are referenced with notable references, then they should be on wikipedia. Ikip (talk) 13:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:RS. As has been said on the AfD only notable books should be included, ie those with articles. That is a compromise, rather than delete. You seem unwilling to remove any that can't be found on google. Verbal chat  13:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We all are trying to comprimise :) I removed almost all of the article :) Thanks for compromising though. Ikip (talk) 13:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Per WP "'Lists, whether they are embedded lists or stand-alone lists, are encyclopedic content as are paragraphs and articles, and they are equally subject to Wikipedia's content policies such as Verifiability, No original research, Neutral point of view, and others.'" It doesn't mean it has to already have a Wikipedia article, however it should be reliable. I'd argue being published by a mainstream publisher (not self-publishing) should be sufficient for preliminary inclusion, given the somewhat esoteric nature of the topic.MartinezMD (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Having reread the WP policies, I'd have to reconsider my stance and agree with the original postings. The books need to be notable or, as the compromise I believe I'm understanding, have a notable author.MartinezMD (talk) 05:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

There is an article about a list of zombie movies that doesn't have to be 'notable'. The title should say: NOTABLE Zombie Novels if you want to have it be for a certain club so to speak. Excluding published works from smaller publishers or even e-books sold by Amazon is self-righteous. If anything, have a secondary list that expands on ALL zombie novels (and I don't necessary mean fan-fiction or the like). If it is publicly available for purchase as a paperback/hardback novel or e-book through a major retailer such as Amazon, then it should be included so that anyone in the world can find such titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.167.153 (talk) 00:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If I write a piece of crap "novel" and self-publish it, then ten people buy it. Should we include it on the list too?  MartinezMD (talk) 02:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

What you consider a "piece of crap" novel is subjective. That is "your opinion". An Encyclopedia is not your personal blog, so quit being self-rightous and acting like you are the only person in all of humanity that controls Wikipedia. Anyone can add to, it seems only a select few can change and leave what they feel is their own justification of what is fact or fiction. The fact is, the title of the article is a "List of Zombie Novels", not notable which was recently added to try and justify your actions, and not mainstream or published by big publishers. A zombie novel is a zombie novel is a zombie novel. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck! Is this so hard to comprehend?! Regardless if it is "crap" by your definition, it is not your right to smear your opinion all over. That in upon itself vandalism of an article just as if someone wrote "penis" all over it. So please get off of your high horse and revert it back to the list that anyone should be able to research. Honestly.


 * The point you miss is that I could write anything and put it in and meet your criteria. There would be no consideration of notability.  The use of the word crap was just the extreme example.  Perhaps you just glossed over the entire discussion, but lists themselves had encyclopedic requirements.  Read through and check the links.  Furthermore, there are many books I like, think are well-written, I initially placed myself, then removed because of the list criteria. Don't assume my motivations.  I have no objection to anyone adding to the list.  I've only removed the ones that were not notable by WP guidelines.  MartinezMD (talk) 23:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Revisiting the topic, the article is "a list of zombie related novels that are notable themselves or by notable authors." I am removing ones that do not have article links for the novel or author or fail to meet WP:GNG with sources. MartinezMD (talk) 22:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect wikilinks
Some links go to unrelated articles/people with the same names. This needs to be fixed. Thanks, Verbal chat  13:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * okay. I won't look into this now, as I will unwatch the page after i add back your links, but you are welcome too. Ikip (talk) 14:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Spam/Internet novels under novels
I will be removing references to online novel as they only clutter the actual novels. They are not respecting WP:EL, WP:SOAP and might be considered as spam. If you want your novel restored, we can discuss here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arch4ngel (talk • contribs) 21:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Categories
I'd like to propose separating out the child/young adult novels from the standard publications. When looking for reading material or categorizing them, as an adult, would it not be useful to do so? MartinezMD (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Self-Promotion
I removed a couple of self-published listings. For one of them, some person/persons keeps readding it (pip and the zombies). I'm trying to avoid an edit war and hold off on delisting it for 24 hours. Any reason, other than them wanting to include it, a non-notable self-published novel should be on the list? Here is what I'm using as a guideline:


 * 1) Notability
 * 2) Source_list
 * 3) Self-publishing
 * 4) Self-promotion

MartinezMD (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Reword
Perhaps "This is a list of notable zombie-related novels" instead of "This is a list of zombie related novels that are notable themselves or by notable authors.". — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJimothyCatface (talk • contribs) 10:47, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That description would then exclude works by notable authors whose individual novels did not receive as much attention.MartinezMD (talk) 15:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 22:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The Girl with All the Gifts
I recommend adding this to the table. Although not a typical zombie novel, it fits the description—Anita5192 (talk) 02:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Zombies in all but death. I'd say it's analogous to the film 28 Days Later. We have its related comic book on the list, so I'm okay with adding this.MartinezMD (talk) 02:45, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Done.—Anita5192 (talk) 06:24, 5 January 2018 (UTC)