Talk:Team of Rivals

Split into two articles?
Seems to me we should have one article on the book and another on the film adaptation.Brian A Schmidt (talk) 18:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:NFF shows Lincoln cannot have an article until filming begins. Alientraveller (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that we should have a film article ASAP, all this stuff about kushner etc has nothing to do with the book. please keep that stuff to a minimum on this page or keep it hiddenDegenFarang (talk) 13:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It is hidden. Alientraveller (talk) 14:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that it is acceptable to have a "Film adaptation" section at this article, since the project is in the context of this topic. I imagine that there is concern because the adaptation is well-covered than the book itself, so it may be worth expanding coverage about the book itself (the level of research done, what reviews have said, and what kind of sales it's had). That should assuage some concerns about the unevenness. — Erik (talk • contrib) 16:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * i took out most everything. i believe this method is in keeping with wikipedia rules, hopefully somebody more experienced can cite the actual rules and clarify...or let us know if detailed descriptions of pre-production happenings is acceptable.DegenFarang (talk) 18:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is, that's what WP:NFF is for. What if the film never gets made huh? Would it still be unacceptable to note Neeson would play Lincoln and Logan and Kushner wrote the script? It's not speculation, it is all confirmed facts. Whatever happened to the "thanks for the expansion message" you put on my talk page? Alientraveller (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the expansion, I'm glad this article is growing. However I do not think this article is the proper place to detail the history of writers which have been assigned to work on this script. However, I have little experience in these matters, if anybody else disagree's which me besides you I suppose I don't have a problem with it. I just think it would be silly to have a 6 paragraph section on this page devoted to the possible movieDegenFarang (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it's currently three thanks to your suggestion. :) Alientraveller (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have consulted with several experienced editors and they all say the same thing: pre-production details should be kept to an absolute minimum until it is certain that the film will go ahead. It is a long shot that this thing even gets made at this point. Detailed information about which writers signed and were replaced, what those old writers focused on and what background research potential actors did is not relevant to the book in any way. This is a page about the book, not about the potential movie. DegenFarang (talk) 14:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for wasting my time with a discussion you didn't even link. Now I've restored the info at Lincoln's depictions page and the article in my sandbox. In the meantime, yeah, let people be unaware of who's playing Lincoln. Alientraveller (talk) 16:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The point you don't seem to get is that that movie will probably never get made. You said I was unreasonable because I wouldn't list who would play Lincoln. a) the movie probably wont get made so nobody will play Lincoln...b) that isn't who will play him, that is just who is slated to play him at this time. c) i never said that could not be included...we just don't need multiple paragraphs about the film. if you want to add something saying 'liam neeson has agreed to play lincoln' that is fine DegenFarang (talk) 17:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your edit and added something about neeson. Please cite the neeson reference if you can. I think this wording is more than enough and arguably we should even remove the stuff about 'while consulting on...' etc. I'm open to expand it beyond this but please relax and don't spaz out and insert huge chunks just to spite me DegenFarang (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Obama Commentary
I removed the sentence at the end of the "Comparisons to..." section that read "Also, many feel that Obama will cling to any popular idea that may boost his celebrity status." It was political commentary, not backed with facts, and not entirely relevant to the discussion. (Bizzarechipmonk (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

I don't think that the Obama commentary has any place in this article. This article is about the book, and a brief recap; not boostering myths about the similarities between the two men. - L —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.214.239 (talk) 03:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Comparisons to the Obama administration
The second paragraph of the Comparisons to the Obama administration seems pretty anti-Obama, as if it is trying to dismiss all of the claims of the previous paragraph. However, this could be entirely in keeping with the book, for all I know. If it has any basis, it should be cited.

Is Obama even discussed in the book, or is this comparison just made outside of it? It seems like this section of the article is less about the book and more about current political rivalries. 129.59.47.19 (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Vidal section
I've removed the following--which mistakenly claimed plagiarism by Kearns Goodwin before I copy edited it--because I don't think it merits its own section, and it doesn't really fit anywhere else in the article. It's an interesting literary anecdote, but I'm divided as to whether it transcends trivia, or if corresponding observations have been made by other sources. More thoughts are welcome. 99.149.87.54 (talk) 00:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Gore Vidal
Author Gore Vidal claimed Goodwin's book borrowed its premise from his novel about Lincoln, at the 2009 Key West Literary Seminar during an interview with Jay Parini

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 20 external links on Team of Rivals. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/11/no-ordinary-tome/304338/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=4989622
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/11/no-ordinary-tome/304338/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/books/review/06mcpherson.html?_r=0&pagewanted=all
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/03/AR2005110301928.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://seattletimes.com/html/books/2002630063_goodwin20.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1101/p13s02-bogn.html/%28page%29/2
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Lincoln-s-rough-roads-to-greatness-Studies-look-2559357.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gettysburg.edu/lincolnprize/index.dot
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gettysburg.edu/lincolnprize/previous-winners.dot
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0B12FD3E540C7A8EDDAA0894DE404482&ref=doriskearnsgoodwin
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-11-28/national/35509468_1_president-obama-leadership-health-care
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-11-19/news/36776577_1_16th-president-partisan-politics-president-elect
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080518115708/http://showbizandstyle.inquirer.net/entertainment/entertainment/view/20080518-137261/Spielberg-may-co-direct-next-with-Peter-Jackson to http://showbizandstyle.inquirer.net/entertainment/entertainment/view/20080518-137261/Spielberg-may-co-direct-next-with-Peter-Jackson
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/07/movies/awardsseason/steven-spielbergs-team-lincoln-is-in-oscar-forefront.html?pagewanted=all
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/13/spielbergs-lincoln-gets-its-mary-todd-sally-field/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imdb.com/news/ni5632136/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://newrepublic.com/blog/plank/111810/tony-kushners-unacknowledged-source-lincoln%23
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2013/0101/Doris-Kearns-Goodwin-on-her-bestselling-books-and-the-movie-adaptation-of-Lincoln/%28page%29/2
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metacritic.com/movie/lincoln

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) 12:04, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Puff phrasing
Goodwin's sixth book, Team of Rivals was well received by critics and won the 2006 Lincoln Prize and the inaugural Book Prize for American History of the New-York Historical Society.

I really hate this device, mainly used by publicists to froth minor details into a breathless onrush. You could get away with this on Wikipedia elsewhere, but it's made even worse in this instance, fronting directly into a list of accolades. If we really need to know it's her sixth book, the fact could be granted its own sentence. &mdash; MaxEnt 02:04, 18 May 2017 (UTC) — edited a minute later