Talk:Red Sorghum (novel)

Title of book and chapters
"Red Sorghum" is the title under which this book is published in English, and, hence, the logical title for the English wikipedia page. Similarly, I have changed the title of the volumes to those appearing in the English translation. Gothicartech's previous edit (21:43 29 Jan 2013) changed the name and introduced the chapter titles. I appreciate that Gothicartech probably knows Chinese better than I do (since I know no Chinese), but Howard Goldblatt is the translater that Mo Yan has chosen. Unless there is a clearly documented comment from Mo Yan himself, we should use Goldblatt's translation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.192.66 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move to Red Sorghum (novel). Nathan Johnson (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Red Sorghum Clan → Red Sorghum – "Red Sorghum" is the title appearing on the front and back covers of this book and on pages 1 and 2 in its official English translation. Alternatively, "Red Sorghum: A Tale of China" is the title appearing on page 3 and on Amazon. "Red Sorghum Clan" appears to be Gothicartech's translation. "Red Sorghum" is also the title of a movie which is based on this book, but this monir ambiguity should not cause problems on wikipedia. Relisted. BDD (talk) 17:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 86.143.192.66 (talk) 22:45, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Move to Red Sorghum (novel) - not sure what new IP user is proposing. The current title "..Clan" is found in Wang Jing's book 1996, but is rare thereafter. Goldblatt's translation "Red Sorghum - A Novel of China" is not visible on Amazon.com cover, nor too commonly used, and Red Sorghum A Family Saga is nearer, but may be preferred as a way to avoid (novel) per WP:DAB? As for notability this looks like a case of Red Sorghum (novel) Red Sorghum (film), except that it is pretty well inconceivable that a book could be more notable than a film of the book, when a film is this famous, and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. A dab isn't needed per TWODABS, ... note sorghum bicolor is linked in the book article. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment a disambiguation page should be built for the three options. (film, novel, plant) -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 05:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose the target is a different article, and the nominator shows no evidence that in the English language world that the novel has primarity over the film, of if he wants to merge the film and novel articles together, or rename the film (thus needing a multimove request) or what to name the film article. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 05:24, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 65.94.76.126, what about dropping "Clan" for (novel)? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:07, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I am ok with renaming it to Red Sorghum (novel) -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 05:05, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment someone should create a redirect at Red Sorghum (film) -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 01:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Move to Red Sorghum (novel), per In ictu oculi. The title "..Clan" is not widely used in English-Haaqfun (talk) 06:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested moves

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. EdJohnston (talk) 03:59, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

– As the novel has been translated into English, it should be the primary topic particularly after Mo Yan won the Nobel Prize and gained notability in the west. The film is just an adaptation. Timmyshin (talk) 00:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Red Sorghum (novel) → Red Sorghum
 * Red Sorghum → Red Sorghum (disambiguation)


 * Oppose – no need, and no support, for a primarytopic claim on this ambiguous title. Dicklyon (talk) 05:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose I think the film would be more likely than the novel as the primary topic. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:48, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support; the films are merely adaptations of the novel, and therefore enhance the historical importance and topic primacy of the novel, which made them possible. bd2412  T 15:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. No case made that the grain is not the primary topic.  Vegaswikian (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Addition of ISBN from Wikidata
Please note that this article's infobox is retrieving an ISBN from Wikidata currently. This is the result of a change made to Infobox book as a result of this RfC. It would be appreciated if an editor took some time to review this ISBN to ensure it is appropriate for the infobox. If it is not, you could consider either correcting the ISBN on Wikidata (preferred) or introducing a blank ISBN parameter in the infobox to block the retrieval from Wikidata. If you do review the ISBN, please respond here so other editors don't duplicate your work. This is an automated message to address concerns that this change did not show up on watchlists. ~ RobTalk 01:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Influence
Red Sorghum received various national and international rewards. The social influence that this novel brings is notable. Therefore it would be great if we could include the rewards and influence Red Sorghum contributes to society. In addition, many social critics have mentioned the value of Red Sorghum. This is also something to include in the article. --BarrrrbY (talk) 02:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)