This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
novels,
novellas,
novelettes and
short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[List of Camp Half-Blood characters#Anabeth Chase|Annabeth Chase]]
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Tyler/Tyson confusion
In the Kirkus review, Tyson was called Tyler twice, if not thrice. Initially, I added Tyler, but now am changing it to Tyson.
Pmlinediter (
talk) 11:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Like the previous book, this novel too is of the fantasy genre.[3] It is considered fast paced,[4] and a blend of the themes of acceptance and family love.[5] It is thought to be humorous, and full of action.[4] By whom?
Fixed Reworded and weasels removed.
Airplanemantalk 21:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)reply
The weasel words are still there. Please see
WP:AWW for more details. warrior4321 02:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
I cannot locate them :(. Where exactly are they? Thanks,
Airplanemantalk 03:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Please give examples of such words. "This book is fast paced" cannot be weasel. It has a ref and the tone looks ok to me. If weasel words are in somewhere else, I need to know that in order to fix. Pmlineditor∞ 11:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Like the previous book, this novel too is of the fantasy genre.[3] It is fast paced,[4] humorous, full of action,[4] and a blend of the themes of acceptance and family love.
are the sentences which contain weasel words. As
WP:AWW says
Who says that?
When do they say it? Now? At the time of writing?
How many people think it? How many is some?
What kind of people think it? Where are they?
What kind of bias might they have?
Why is this of any significance?
Weasel words do not really give a neutral point of view; they just spread hearsay, or couch personal opinion in vague, indirect syntax. It is better to put a name to an opinion than it is to assign it to an anonymous or vague-to-the-point-of-being-meaningless source. warrior4321 20:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
I've changed it to "Reviewers consider it to be fast paced,[4] humorous, full of action,[4] and a blend of the themes of acceptance and family love.[5]" if that is ok. Pmlineditor∞ 08:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Plot
The plot section is too long compared to the other sections.
Refs lack details, e.g. ref 3 - no idea what it is, by looking at the ref, '"The Sea of Monsters". Retrieved 2009-09-20." - what is it? a book, a mag, a website? who wrote it? when? etc
more independent sources would be good. the criticism they've used has B&N and Amazon; both of those are not independent sources. Maybe you can find some reviews in newspapers and stuff?
I'll try but you'll see that sources available for this book are pretty few. The majority of sources that are offline aren't available here. Nevertheless, I'll try and look for sources.
The only reference used for the awards is the author's website. Provide more reliable sources for all the awards.
They are in bold in order to better distinguish their names from the rest of the text. I don't think the use of it is excessive. What is your take?
Airplanemantalk 02:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)reply
It is not a Wikipedia standard to use ”'bold”' in this manner; in fact, it would be preferable to rewrite this section in prose-format, rather than as a list. See
MOS:BOLD. warrior4321 03:05, 8 October 2009 (UTC)reply
I'm not so sure that's a good idea. It is a listing of the main characters with brief descriptions of each and their role played in the book. Rewriting the section in prose would defeat the section's purpose, which is to list the main characters. Maybe they could be italicized? (I'd have to change the format in The Lightning Thief too then so they match ;)).
Airplanemantalk 19:16, 11 October 2009 (UTC)reply
This is what I was talking about when I meant "prose-format". warrior4321 22:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Fixed - Ah, ok. I'll go around to the other articles and do the same!
Airplanemantalk 21:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)reply
An image used in this article,
File:Birmingham.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
As this is an Encyclopedia, I think this poem should be explained. I do not have a clue what it is supposed to mean, as I have not read the book. --
Murata (
talk) 01:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)reply
Release date?
Noticed the release date was recently changed from April 2, 2006 to April 5 by an IP. Anybody know which is correct? Can't seem to find any more than "April 2006" on any official sites.
2ReinreB2 (
talk) 20:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)reply
The Kirkus source I found in the article says April 1. I am a little bit skeptical of all of those dates, because book release day is Tuesday by tradition. But we go with what the sources say. If there are more that disagree, we should just use "April 2006".
Elizium23 (
talk) 00:57, 22 September 2015 (UTC)reply
I have just added archive links to one external link on
The Sea of Monsters. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I check pages listed in
Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for
orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of
The Sea of Monsters's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not.
AnomieBOT⚡ 16:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)reply