Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Novels

Character lists and the use of bold

See discussion Talk Great Expectations and Project Novels. I suggest modifying the guideline for characters to read as follows:

3.3 Characters

If appropriate, a character section would consist of brief character outlines, as opposed to a simple list. Characters' names should only be indented (though subsections may be used for lengthy descriptions); bold should not be used. Most articles do not need this section. Instead, a finely crafted plot summary is used to introduce the characters to the reader.

Length of plot summary in proportion to book

For years, this page said Size of the plot summary should be roughly proportional to the size of the plot. This is not always equivalent to the length of the work, since some plots are complex and dense while others are simple and straightforward. In August, that turned into Regardless of the length of the novel, a complex and dense plot will need a longer summary than a simple and straightforward one. But with the recent rewrite, that has now been removed entirely. I suppose the reason for saying A summary for a full-length novel should be between 400 and 700 words is that a summary for a shorter work could be under 400 words. But "full-length" is a bit ambiguous. The current wording could be seen as suggesting that a novella's summary should be much less than 700 words. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but the point about plot summary length depending more on complexity than on story length was present from 2007 until just weeks ago. So I think it should be reintegrated somehow. That no one objected to this removal doesn't mean much, since the focus was mainly on discouraging plot summaries over 700 words. 183.89.250.246 (talk) 22:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that we lost that detail. I definitely agree that plot complexity should be the driving factor for length. I'd support adding back in Regardless of the length of the novel, a complex and dense plot will need a longer summary than a simple and straightforward one. or something similar. Over at WP:FILMPLOT they say The summary should not exceed this range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as with non-linear storylines, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range. I like that the film version gives an example, though I don't think non-linear storylines exactly apply here. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

This was my attempt, which was reverted. An alternative would be to not specify any minimum length, in which case this whole idea would flow better. I still think it might be better not to specify any minimum length, especially considering that this page is not just about novels per se. 183.89.250.246 (talk) 13:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

"An alternative would be to not specify any minimum length". No, that was rejected immediately above. MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

That was why I tried to add something that would fit with the wording that was there, rather than doing a larger rewrite. 183.89.250.246 (talk) 14:08, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't agree, but I wouldn't strongly oppose adding Regardless of the length of the novel, a complex and dense plot will need a longer summary than a simple and straightforward one if somebody wants to seek a new widely-supported consensus. More important is the issue of process. The whole paragraph was the subject of recent detailed discussion, and the consensus wording (deliberately leaving out that sentence which is, in my view, little more than a self-evident platitude) was agreed only two weeks ago. It's bad practice and highly wasteful of editors' time to attempt to overturn carefully-constructed agreed wordings on the basis that 'the focus was really' on something else. If anyone thinks it's important enought to seek a new consensus, please ping all those who contributed to the current consensus wording and ask if they'd like it changed. Otherwise, this simply comes across as an attempt to re-insert wording that the community has already agreed should no longer be there. MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I think I solved part of the problem by editing the intro, so that we're not saying that this applies "equally" to novellas and short stories. As for the Plot section, I would suggest adding The length of a plot summary should correlate more to the complexity of the plot than to the length of the book. I don't feel strongly enough about that to ping all the editors from the previous discussion, but I will note that a user just above said they hadn't noticed that that detail had been lost, so again, I don't really think the previous discussion should be seen as a rejection of that point. 183.89.250.246 (talk) 15:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

When a new text is agreed by consensus, there must by definition be changes. The new consensus replaces the old. Without a new full discussion – which given the shortness of time that has elapsed must in my view include pings to all who previously contributed – there's no basis to select a random element from the superseded wording and put it into the new text. I have no problem with the proposed amendment to the introduction. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I do. The page contains many principles and some explicit instructions (i.e. the numerical boundaries for the plot section). The introduction was clear and accurate as was, the principles apply equally. The plot length numbers apply to an full length novel, there's no benefit in creating and maintaining text here to cover every eventuality. If you encounter a novella that's too long, and you really need to refer to this guidelines to fix it, simply say that it should be concise and cover the important events in the narrative.Scribolt (talk) 16:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I still think this was a worthwhile point, but I guess it wouldn't fit very well with the current wording, and a larger rewrite of that paragraph seems to be out of the question. The edit reverted here was unrelated to that, other than being in the same paragraph. I didn't quite expect such a reaction to the addition of one word which was basically accurate, but whatever. 183.89.250.246 (talk) 01:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Navigation boxes

Should this page include anything about navigation boxes? For instance, the ones that appear at the bottom of The Hound of the Baskervilles. Or would that be too complicated for this page? 183.89.250.246 (talk) 21:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I'd say don't mention. Most novel articles won't have any. Schazjmd (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)