Talk:Lorna Doone

Story summary

The summary that I have written is based on the BBC two-part series adaptation and not the book. I intend to read the book but have yet to do so. I would be grateful if someone would check that the story as written is true to the the book, which is the subject of this article. --Giddie 11:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

It is a correct account, but very brief, and the point that Lorna is not a Doone should be made more clearly. Xanthoxyl 21:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but it is not an accurate account of the book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.20.213.224 (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Other versions and cultural references

One of the references simply says "Lorna Kennedy was named after Lorna Doone." Lorna Kennedy is not linked to any article, nor do I find evidence that there is anyone of note by that name. zadcat (talk) 01:15, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with Template:Tl banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 23:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I find this amusing. However, I refuse to change it. Yes, it is related to a food, but still. :D Ottava Rima (talk) 00:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lorna Doone. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070704072352/http://www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk/print/index/learning_about/general_information/geography/climate/snow/blizzards.htm to http://www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk/print/index/learning_about/general_information/geography/climate/snow/blizzards.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100810144501/http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/browse/ZL.HTM to http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/browse/ZL.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051103035834/http://www.litfix.com/blackmore/lorna/index.html to http://www.litfix.com/blackmore/lorna/index.html

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) 01:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Plot

The plot needs to be severely edited. The plot summary provided is clearly based on the BBC adaptation and not the original book. It provides users with a false summary of the original story which included many additional plot lines particularly related to Lorna.

Were the Doones real?

If so what is known about them? 86.187.163.218 (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

The story is fictional. There are people with the surname Doone, but there was no outlaw Doone family in Exmoor at the time depicted in the novel. Mediatech492 (talk) 17:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

lead image

I don't think the first edition's title page is any better as WP:LEADIMAGE than the 1893 edition cover. — Ирука¹³ 10:59, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

It is better as it is the first edition, per MOS:NOVELS. The old one was the US version, published 24 years later. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

It might be better if it were a cover. But it's not a cover.

And a cover with the book's title for identification is better than a blue rectangle.

And, in this case, according to section "Publication history", the first edition does not have the advantages that first editions usually have. — Ирука¹³ 17:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

For older books, before decorative covers became a thing, it's absolutely normal and preferred to use the true first edition title page rather than a later cover, even if the latter would look prettier: Emma (novel), Frankenstein, The Moonstone, Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights and many more. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Just because something is on Wikipedia somewhere doesn't mean it has to be there.

I would be grateful if you could give examples of several status articles. — Ирука¹³ 11:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "status article". I've already given you five long-standing comparable examples, though, to demonstrate that this is normal practice, and apparently you don't like examples. While I'm happy to discuss this on its merits, so far you've avoided giving any basis at all for your opinion that the first edition title page is no better than a US cover, published 24 years later. We can invite other editors here if need be. MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

By status articles I mean WP:GA and WP:FA. All content in these articles is reviewed; including files.

I have already explained my opinion above.

If you want, you can draw attention to this conversation from other editors. It was enough for me to express my opinion on the article's talk page. — Ирука¹³ 12:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Candide, The Man in the Moone, The Blood of the Vampire, Ved Vejen, A Voyage to the Moon (Tucker novel). MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. (..but now I wonder where the line is between the placement of the book cover and the title page.) — Ирука¹³ 14:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)