Talk:Raymond Harold Sawkins

Links
Someone needs to sort out the links. Why should the book "Rhinoceros" link to the pages for the actual animal Rhinoceros?

Plagiarism: see http://www.poezie.ro/index.php/author/0035063/Colin%20Forbes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.120.185 (talk) 09:25, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Criticism
Appears to be biased against the author. Same criticisms are repeated twice and could do with a tidy up and some sourcing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HillWalker1988 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just found the article and was shocked by how openly scathing and biased the criticism is. I've only read three of his books (Avalanche Express, Heights of Zervos and Terminal) and enjoyed all of them, especially the first two. Perhaps some of the criticisms are true of his later books, but they have no place in this article if there are no references to back up the assertions - otherwise we're left with an article that effectively says "one or more of the contributors to this article personally feel that Forbes' books suck" which is IMO inappropriate.
 * Some of the more obviously biased (and lacking even a single citation) statements made in the article: "The author seems to express his own right-wing views on topics such as immigration, equality and the political climate of the UK through the character of Tweed", "Plots in Forbes novels tend to be rather thin and insubstantial. The writing can also be considered rather simplistic, such as in its overuse of superlative forms.", "The laws of physics and logics never seemed to concern Forbes. ... Some argue he was beginning to suffer from dementia."
 * I'm sorely tempted to excise almost all of this from the article as it stands. Destynova (talk) 00:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact, I just went ahead and did that. All of the biased, unsourced criticism in that section came from three anonymous IP editors who appear to have made not a single other edit on Wikipedia. Destynova (talk) 00:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Paul T says: I persoanlly agree with the comments that you describe as biased.... I think that such comments are valid if supported by examples, which they weren't. Remove or wait for substantiation, that is the question! I think removal was correct as the entry will be read by many as truth until corrected. (It seems Forbes learnt his craft from WE Johns' Biggles adventures!)

I have read a number of his books with great pleasure. I am not a literary critic, but I must make an exception in the case of his last book, The Savage Gorge. A publisher's comment indicates it was submitted just 3 weeks before the author died. It starts out well, but about half way through, deteriorates to a disjuncted and often confusing and confused plot/flow of story - almost as if in draft point format, thinly translated into prose. I can only conclude this was the product of a failing mind in his last days, and not typical of his other work. It's publishing is a surprise to me - perhaps for the fan market to have his last work...? Ptilinopus (talk) 01:13, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

'''I haven't checked structure elsewhere.... but surely the main entry should be under Raymond Harold Sawkins, with links from all his pseudonyms.

'''

Was he a women hater
I'm reading the Greek Key..... why is one of the main characters supposedly one of the good guys beating a woman that he's just made love to?? 79.69.227.193 (talk) 11:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)