Talk:The Red Pyramid

Mention of trivia

Why is there no trivia mention of the fact that the book takes place in the same universe as the Percy Jackson & the Olympians series? 69.207.201.84 (talk) 07:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, it must be on the Kane Chronicles series page. I'll add that. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 12:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It`s debatable. At certain points, it hints that they are in the same universe. However, I`m not sure if the author has mentioned anything about it. 125.237.148.11 (talk) 10:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

It does not specifically say it, but it does strongly suggest it. For example, while looking at the Empire State Building Carter and Sadie's uncle mentions "other gods"(ie Greek Gods) on that end of the city. Sumsum2010·T·C·Review me! 03:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

It does more then hint... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.83.3 (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

The person who says "It does more then hint..." is right, during at least the first two short stories that are at the end of each book there are both characters from the Greco-Roman serieses and characters from the series discussed during the article.

Why is there nomention about the Mexican gods there is a breif refrence in the book —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.173.214 (talk) 18:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Reviews

I have not read the book, but I've found some reviews linked off Riordan's blog that could go in a new "Critical Reception" seciton.

• The Washington Post [1] (also included in their summer reading club.)
• The New York Times [2]
• Kirkus Reviews [3]

Welcome, --Glimmer721 ^talk 23:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I also discovered this interview: [4].

Thanks! I'll add them to the article ASAP. --Perseus, Son of Zeus 15:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Graphic Novel

The graphic novel has already been released, this part of the article needs to be changed. EgyptKEW9 15:13, 17 December 2012 (UTC)EgyptKEW9EgyptKEW9 15:13, 17 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptKEW9 (talk • contribs)

Requested move 18 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:46, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

---

The Red Pyramid (novel) → The Red Pyramid – The Red Pyramid redirects to the current title. The article was redirected per WP:BOLD on the grounds that Red Pyramid is the only item that needs to be disambiguated with the novel, and that the pyramid is never exclusively referred to as "The Red Pyramid" except when "The" is used as an article. Thanks, King Prithviraj II (talk) 15:58, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

• But is "The" enough distinction from the Red Pyramid at Giza? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
• @King Prithviraj II: queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, like I said, the "the" is only used as an article in front of Red Pyramid and never (emphasis here) along with "Red Pyramid" in other cases. Also, a note has been left on top of both articles, by which misguided (if any) readers can go to the articles they wish to read. An example would be The Sea of Monsters, another work by the same author and Sea of Monsters, an orchestral piece. King Prithviraj II (talk) 16:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose the move was needed. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

  I still don't get the logic. "The Red Pyramid" is never used to refer to the monument attached as a whole, it only appears when "the" does its job as an article. There is no need to disambiguate if the target location is open. King Prithviraj II (talk) 19:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

• Support. Anyone bothering to type "The" is more likely looking for the book. There's no conflict between titles, and as long as hatnotes are in place on each article, no confusion. Station1 (talk) 07:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
• Support, the hatnotes are more than adequate. —Xezbeth (talk) 07:58, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose - Sneferu's pyramid is best known as "The Red Pyramid", not just a random red pyramid. Just look at the first line of the Red Pyramid's lead for evidence of this, or try a Google search. I have personally gone searching for the actual pyramid rather than the book using "the" on Wikipedia. It's how many Egyptologists and others refer to that structure. The "(novel)" part needs to stay for this article, because otherwise it is not clear which is which. And we need to change the redirect The Red Pyramid away from this page and to a disambig page; it's not helping the clarity issue at all. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 04:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

  In which case The Red Pyramid should redirect to the pyramid with the current hatnote providing disambiguation. Either way, there does not need to be a dab page. —Xezbeth (talk) 08:42, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

  Other than guardians.net, all other search results write Red Pyramid, with "the" used as an article. Even guardians.net addresses the pyramid as red pyramid after the first sentence. I also notice some false positives of the novel lurking around after the first results page. King Prithviraj II (talk) 07:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

• Support - No conflict between titles. In case there is a minor conflict as 2ReinreB2 points out, the hatnotes would suffice. 31.215.115.49 (talk) 10:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:TWODABS. Asserting "the move was needed" is not an argument for anything, much less basis to oppose this proposal. The other oppose is based on the premise that Senferu's pyramid is best known as "The Red Pyramid", but this was refuted days ago, with no rebuttal. --В²C ☎ 18:45, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.