Talk:Pedro Páramo

Comala, Colima
The town has at least one mural related to the novel, with a quotation appearing on a wall near the town square. Varlaam (talk) 17:30, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Juan Rulfo's Comala is an imaginary town located somewhere in Rulfo's native state of Jalisco. Comala in Colima state is just trying to profit on Pedro Paramo's success. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.198 (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC) In the novel the priest walks from Comala to Zapotlán el Grande in two hours, and Comala is on the road to Sayula, Rulfo's birthplace.70.233.128.31 (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Father Renteria walks to Contla, not Zapotlan.
 * All of the references in the novel are to towns/villages in a very particular region of Jalisco. Contla, Sayula, and so on. I would place Comala on a map somewhere between the two, probably closer to Contla. Colima can go fly a kite.

What
This article is fucked up. Someone really needs to fix this.
 * Agreed. It looks like a High School student class assignment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.198 (talk) 23:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Eh, it's not that bad. The only thing that really needs fixing is the formatting of the "minor characters" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.113.151.58 (talk) 23:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia brah 24.172.171.14 (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Influence
Given that Pedro Paramo is considered the most important Mexican literary work, I cannot believe that its only cultural influence has been an epigraph in Time magazine. What about its influence in magic realism and the whole Latin American Boom?

New movie
Mateo Gil's attempt to film a movie based on Pedro Paramo (with Gael Bernal as leading actor) was canceled in 2009. Any references to this failed attempt needs to be removed from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.198 (talk) 18:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Detail
This article is almost as long as the novel.WQUlrich (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

A note about the first tag in the article stating the article isn't very relevant and unnecessarily detailed while directed to a very narrow or "particular audience"
I already rewrote all bibliographic sources, adding all missing parameters as most of the sources before were composed only of a link to some external website; I also added at least 6 more sources from reputable sources such as literary journals; finally, I also rewrote some parts to make them more understandable and eliminated the "original research"/"citation needed" tags because I put in-text citations wherever needed. I will keep improving the article but I wanted to ask why can't we remove the tag at the start of the article which says that the article is way too detailed and long for a subject that won't interest many people; this is one of the most fundamental books in Latin American literature and the works of the Nobel Literature winner Garcia Marquez and Borges could not have been written without Rulfo's seminal work. I know Pedro Paramo isn't very well-known in English-speaking countries (sadly) but to say that it's not very relevant isn't really true and actually sounds rather ignorant and narrow-minded (no offense intended). As such, I firmly and strongly believe the tag in question should be removed and I request that it be removed. --177.227.43.209 (talk) 22:45, 3 July 2021 (UTC)