Talk:Marian Keyes

Untitled
Why is the NPOV disputed tag here? Whoever it was didn't explainMerkinsmum 05:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Looking at the history, the NPOV tag was put there before some abusive comparisons to Terry Pratchett were removed. So no longer any need for the tag, I think: I'm removing it. Dsp13 00:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marian Keyes. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070324054540/http://www.mariankeyesbooks.com/ to http://www.mariankeyesbooks.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:56, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Between Ourselves
I do not know where best to put this, but this article could mention that Marian Keyes has appeared in a BBC Radio 4 comedy with Tara Flynn called "Between Ourselves". Vorbee (talk) 17:47, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Views
I have grave concerns about the 'Views' section of this article. It does not appear encyclopedic at all. The whole section feels, if not OR, very deliberate cherry-picking to undermine the subject of the article, while also being very parochial in some of the examples given.

I'm minded to strike the whole section out, because none of the examples seem to have any significance either in themselves or on Keyes's work, and I'm deeply uncomfortable with the framing of the views on women writers, which seem to be deliberately framed to show her in the worst possible light, and thus veer dangerously close to POV statements.

Before I try and fix that section to be at least more even-handed, I thought I would at least mention the issue and my intentions on this Talk page, so that if any others think differently they can have their say. H. Carver (talk) 04:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Style & "Chick Lit"
It's pretty depressing that the largest paragraph in the style section is discussing the term "chick lit" and not, actually, any aspect of her style of as a writer. Wikipedia is actually exemplifying the sexism that Keyes criticises in her rejection of this term: it's impossible to imagine a discussion of the style of a male popular writer revolving around such a dismissive, gendered term. If the chick lit content belongs anywhere in this article (and I think it does, at least the quotation where she rejects the term) it's in the "views" section which now seems quite balanced, and where Keyes's views in this area are discussed. Atrapalhado (talk) 21:00, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To quote NPOV, "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." I agree that the article was unbalanced - you can see what I wrote on the talk page just before you - but there is a danger of unbalancing the article the other way. I don't think it's wrong to balance the mention of Keyes' rejecting the term "chick-lit" by representing the fact that her work has been described as such in the past. It shows what she is reacting against. Rather than introduce potential editorial bias by removing sourced material from the Style section because you think there isn't enough about her style as a writer, why not add what you think is missing (with sources) instead? H. Carver (talk) 00:14, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Mental illness
Which book of yours relates to mental illness, I save you in bbc’s Imagine, I’m a male and can relate to alot of what you said 84.68.153.249 (talk) 00:07, 8 February 2022 (UTC)