Talk:483: Fiction Rule of Thumb - Revision history

2001:4C4E:1C0B:2500:530A:C00A:69F7:CA1E at 05:01, 25 March 2026

2026-03-25T05:01:55Z

42.book.addict at 16:28, 5 November 2024

2024-11-05T16:28:35Z

172.70.85.128 at 21:00, 2 October 2024

2024-10-02T21:00:28Z

108.162.237.56 at 19:06, 2 October 2024

2024-10-02T19:06:46Z

Psychoticpotato at 13:15, 23 May 2024

2024-05-23T13:15:39Z

Psychoticpotato at 12:49, 23 May 2024

2024-05-23T12:49:41Z

162.158.111.62: An exception for Dante?

2021-11-10T18:27:01Z

An exception for Dante?

141.101.98.250 at 16:59, 18 October 2017

2017-10-18T16:59:32Z

141.101.98.23 at 01:03, 22 April 2016

2016-04-22T01:03:27Z

108.162.228.41 at 21:48, 23 December 2015

2015-12-23T21:48:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:01, 25 March 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)		You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

−	Ronald Dahl literally did this so much the language was called "Gobblefunk". No exception there? It gave his stories a delightfully whimsical feel. {{unsigned ip\|108.162.237.56\|19:06, 2 October 2024)}	+	Ronald Dahl literally did this so much the language was called "Gobblefunk". No exception there? It gave his stories a delightfully whimsical feel. {{unsigned ip\|108.162.237.56\|19:06, 2 October 2024}}
−	(

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 :What's the problem?
 :If you can make up a story you should be able to make up words. A much worse problem is when an author thinks describing scenery is part of the story. And when women stop in mid paragraph to describe clothing... Feck that!
-:Making up a word or two to get around shit like that is OK. It is only hand-waving a ghost out from the machine. Asimov was terrible for that crap in his early work. He grew out of it, in a manner of speaking, recognising there was a time and place.
+:Making up a word or two to get around shit like that is OK. It is only hand-waving a ghost out from the machine. Asimov was terrible for that crap in his early work. He grew out of it, in a manner of speaking, recognising there was a time and place. {{unsigned|Weatherlawyer|00:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)}}
 there are many exceptions to this rule... Jhereg, for example.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.51.116|173.245.51.116]] 10:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:00, 2 October 2024
Line 33:		Line 33:
	You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)		You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

−	Ronald Dahl literally did this so much the language was called "Gobblefunk". No exception there? It gave his stories a delightfully whimsical feel. ~~	+	Ronald Dahl literally did this so much the language was called "Gobblefunk". No exception there? It gave his stories a delightfully whimsical feel. {{unsigned ip\|108.162.237.56\|19:06, 2 October 2024)}
		+	(

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:06, 2 October 2024
Line 32:		Line 32:

	You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)		You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	Ronald Dahl literally did this so much the language was called "Gobblefunk". No exception there? It gave his stories a delightfully whimsical feel. ~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:15, 23 May 2024
Line 30:		Line 30:
	Well, writing from Italy here... Dante's Divina Commedia is largely acknowledged as containing tons of made-up words and then-weird sentences that are now common sayings in Italian. And we're talking about one of the world's greatest literature masterpieces ever :) does that count as an exception?		Well, writing from Italy here... Dante's Divina Commedia is largely acknowledged as containing tons of made-up words and then-weird sentences that are now common sayings in Italian. And we're talking about one of the world's greatest literature masterpieces ever :) does that count as an exception?
	:Most certainly! [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 12:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)		:Most certainly! [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 12:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	You know, if you don't explain the words and just let readers piece together their meanings with outside context, it's much more acceptable to do this. [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 13:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:49, 23 May 2024
Line 29:		Line 29:

	Well, writing from Italy here... Dante's Divina Commedia is largely acknowledged as containing tons of made-up words and then-weird sentences that are now common sayings in Italian. And we're talking about one of the world's greatest literature masterpieces ever :) does that count as an exception?		Well, writing from Italy here... Dante's Divina Commedia is largely acknowledged as containing tons of made-up words and then-weird sentences that are now common sayings in Italian. And we're talking about one of the world's greatest literature masterpieces ever :) does that count as an exception?
		+	:Most certainly! [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 12:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:27, 10 November 2021
Line 27:		Line 27:

	What about Animorphs? There are quite a few made-up words there, and Randall is a fan of Animorphs. Why is Animorphs not mentioned in the title text?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.250\|141.101.98.250]] 16:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)		What about Animorphs? There are quite a few made-up words there, and Randall is a fan of Animorphs. Why is Animorphs not mentioned in the title text?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.250\|141.101.98.250]] 16:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	Well, writing from Italy here... Dante's Divina Commedia is largely acknowledged as containing tons of made-up words and then-weird sentences that are now common sayings in Italian. And we're talking about one of the world's greatest literature masterpieces ever :) does that count as an exception?

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:59, 18 October 2017
Line 25:		Line 25:

	I think a lot of comments here are based on missunderstanding. The CHANCE that the book is good is lower. It doesn't mean "more made up words" -> "worse book". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.41\|108.162.228.41]] 21:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)		I think a lot of comments here are based on missunderstanding. The CHANCE that the book is good is lower. It doesn't mean "more made up words" -> "worse book". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.41\|108.162.228.41]] 21:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	What about Animorphs? There are quite a few made-up words there, and Randall is a fan of Animorphs. Why is Animorphs not mentioned in the title text?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.250\|141.101.98.250]] 16:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:48, 23 December 2015
Line 19:		Line 19:

	I'm surprised that {{w\|A Clockwork Orange}} by Anthony Burgess hasn't been mentioned. It is regularly featured in 'Top 100 Books' lists, but features its own language, Nadsat. --[[User:Pudder\|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder\|talk]]) 11:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)		I'm surprised that {{w\|A Clockwork Orange}} by Anthony Burgess hasn't been mentioned. It is regularly featured in 'Top 100 Books' lists, but features its own language, Nadsat. --[[User:Pudder\|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder\|talk]]) 11:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	I think a lot of comments here are based on missunderstanding. The CHANCE that the book is good is lower. It doesn't mean "more made up words" -> "worse book". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.41\|108.162.228.41]] 21:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)