Talk:Obernewtyn Chronicles

Note that there is already far more content about this series at Isobelle Carmody than there is on this page. Unless this page is significantly expanded, it may be advisable to marge and refiret this page into Isobelle Carmody. DES (talk) 07:16, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Have amended the content of this page Rigel 13:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Genre
I'm unsure what genre to call The Obernewtyn Chronicles. I would call them fantasy, but they're not really fantasy in the true sense of the word. But neither are they really true science fiction. Speculative fiction doesn't seem descriptive enough. Matters are further complicated because the articles for each individual book list different genres. Any opinions? Albreda 04:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems to me that they are SF with trappings that create the superficial illusion of being fantasy, kinda like McCaffrey's Pern books (which are no more fantasy than, say, Heinlein's typical juvenile).-- Orange Mike 00:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I agree with what you're saying and I think it's right, they are essentially SF with fantasy trappings. But I'm a little reluctant to put them as SF only, because to me that conjures up images of spaceships and blazing guns (irrespective of whether or not that is what SF really is) - and that is not at all what the OberChron is about. What do you think? Can it just be left as SF/fantasy? Albreda 06:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

In my own head I always refer to Obernewtyn-espque stories as post-apocalyptic fantasy... but that might not satisfy.

Isobelle Carmody describes them as fantasy. Not when asked, but at Convergence, she described herself as a fantasy writer. I agree that they're not "typical" fantasy. But neither are any Fantasy of Manners books. And it's definitely more fantasy than even the early Pern books (the later Pern books are definitely Sci-Fi). They may not have usual fantasy trappings. But they do have prophecies. RoseWill 13:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm doing a Science Fiction unit in English at the moment, and we studied Obernewtyn. So my teacher definitely viewed it as sci-fi, if that helps.

203.129.37.215 (talk) 06:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

In-Universe
I have listed this article as having in-universe problems. There is a link to information about this in the infobox. I should note that I also have concerns that the article may be unencyclopedic as it is primarily a summary only. This is against wikipedia's official policy (linked above) which states: "Plot summaries. Wikipedia articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot. A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic."

This summary may also constitute a copyright violation as a derivative work as well as Wikipedia's Fair use policy. I have not tagged the article yet with notices on these points as this could lead to speedy deletion without giving you much opportunity to rectify the problems. Thanks baby_ifritah 06:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge?
I see no reason for a merge - I can however see the article has problems that you mention above. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  10:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If all the problematic material here and in the book articles was removed, there would not be a lot of content left. If there was enough solid information to sustain all the articles they would definitely be worthy of individual ones.  In the meantime, my thinking is that one good article is better than five stubs.  baby_ifritah 12:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Probaly shouldn't merge, as they are all seperate books, published at different times.

I think that because it's a series of books and not one compilation, separate articles can be warranted. This makes the main series article less heavy on content which would be better utilised separated. I do agree however that because it is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, maybe things like plot synopses are going a bit too far. The way I see it, the blurb of the book should be sufficient along with the publication details and cover/s. That's my 2 cents worth. ~ DarkS Umbreon 15:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm against merging as well. I think the plot summary could come out of this article. Maybe a paragraph for each book and link to the book's article. This article could deal with Obernewytn-world wide information, information about various Talents, the characters, the fact that it's set in what was Scotland, the implications of the history that caused the apocalypse, etc. I'll take a look at it, but I won't be able to do that for a while. Secondsilk (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with secondsilk the whole article is way too long particularly for people who have never read the series i mean come who would... especially when they know nothing about it and have to read a big bulk of information which isn't really helpful to them. I mean what if it was just a light search on the net to see how the book is and instead find a bulk of infomation that literally tells the whole story. They need to defintely shorten the overall article.skyblue_azure7:58 December 2007