Talk:Ender's Game

Archives
Archive 1 (August 2002-November 2006)

Movie

The article states that the movie script was completed in 2003. I am trying to find a source for this, which will be difficult, but I know that as early as 1998 that there had been at least one draft of a movie script that Orson Scott Card had. Secondhand knowledge isn't wiki-material but I grew up in Greensboro, NC where OSC lives and has much of his family, and I know that one of his nephews that I went to school with was very excited about a movie that was being made, with a completed script, and they were talking about casting of it. This was in 1998. I'm only putting this out there, because perhaps someone has some solid information or links regarding earlier scrapped scripts and productions. Personally hoping that they make this movie as dark as they should, and not some StarWars I mushy thing. It's a very sad ending obviously, and should not end on a high note. 71.174.183.251 04:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)DavidFisher

How is it a sad ending? He was pushed way beyond his limits and triumphed over a totally superior race. While he didn't know that he was commiting mass murder (not technically xenocide) he still attemps to atone for his guilt giving it a more hopeful ending than anything else. Kaoskaix 18:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it is a sad ending that pursists throughout the rest of the quartet, but if the rest of the books are not made into movies, I don't think they can make the ending extremly saddening or it will drive people away like so many people were driven away from the rest of the books. --Jln Dlphk (talk) 01:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Plot Summary

It seems that the plot for this page has been characterized as too long. How about this:

The book takes place somewhere in the near-distant future of Earth. Mankind has made contact with an insectoid alien race known to humanity as the Formics, of colloquially as "Buggers." The buggers have attempted to invade earth twice, having been narrowly defeated the first time by a man named Mazer Rackham, and the threat of the third bugger invasion looms large over the earth.

Enter Ender Wiggin, a six-year-old boy and third son of his parents, an audacity under the population restriction laws, permitted only by special sanction by the government who is seeking the next brilliant military commander. Young Ender is approved by the government for training at the elite Battle School, a space station where children train in armies commanded by older children in mock 40-on-40 battles. Ender chooses to accept the government's offer, leaving behind his parents, his sister Valentine whom he deeply cares for, and his sadistic and manipulative older brother Peter.

Upon arrival at Battle School, Ender is immediately singled out by the administration and kept at arm's length from the camaraderie of the students there. He moves quickly from army to army, annoying many of his commanders with his brilliance which serves to reflect their inadequacy, and he quickly becomes the top-ranking soldier in school. Ender finds a way around the teacher's psychological segregation of him by forming his own nightly "practice" sessions, instructing anyone who wishes to come in zero-gravity battle simulations, teaching other students battle strategy and tactics regardless of their given army alliance.

Meanwhile, Ender is participating off and on in a fantasy video game created by the administration to monitor their students psychologically. Ender progresses farther than any student before, and the computer struggles to come up with images to show Ender as he goes beyond the programming of the game. Ender acts out scenes of gruesome violence and ultimately compassion as he struggles with the images the computer is creating for him. Eventually, the images become too gruesome and unbearable for him, and he refuses to play any longer.

Back on Earth, Ender's brother and sister have begun trying their hand at popular politics, assuming the virtual identities of Locke and Demosthenes. The latter, written by Valentine is a hot-headed rabble-rouser who stirs up discontent and whose main purpose is to provide a counterpoint to Peter's Locke identity, whom Peter is using to gain real power and influence over the world stage.

Ender is quickly promoted to commander of a brand new army, and he molds these young soldiers into an unbeaten team, despite the teachers stacking every game against him. Some time after an especially brutal victory against one of Ender's former commanders, Bonzo Madrid, Ender is cornered in the shower by Bonzo along with a few of Bonzo's soldiers. Unable to escape the situation without violence, Ender convinces Bonzo to fight him alone and Ender defeats him soundly. As Bonzo's unmoving body lies on the shower floor, the school administration comes in and takes Ender from the shower directly to a shuttle for command school after a brief stop on Earth to visit his sister Valentine.

Ender is taught at command school by Mazer Rackham, kept alive into his own future by sending him away at near lightspeed and then turning around and bringing him back at near lightspeed. Mazer instructs Ender in a game very similar to the Battle room, only this time instead of commanding soldiers, Ender will command ships in a 3-d space battle. Mazer puts Ender through a grueling pace of games, followed by critiques and then more games. At this point, Ender is reunited with the closest people to him from battle school as his subordinates in this battle game. Ender commands them directly, and it is up to them to carry out his commands. Ender is told that from now on, he will play against Mazer directly, and that it is these tests that will determine if he is ready to command the fleet that Earth is sending against the Bugger threat. There is a new weapon Ender is given in these tests- The Molecular Disruption Device or MD Device. It is an energy ray which causes solid matter to deconstruct itself down to the molecular level, and that deconstruction causes a sphere of energy to expand around the target. Any additional matter caught in this sphere is drawn into the process and chain reactions to additional matter around it. Ender finds this weapon particularly useful against closely-grouped fighters, but much less effective once Mazer learns to keep his ships separated.

Each day the games become more and more grueling, and Ender is slowly being worn down to psychosis. Mazer confronts Ender, telling him that he will face a final exam, a simulation involving the bugger homeworld. The game begins, and Ender is outnumbered 1,000 to 1. His commanders express hesitancy at their odds and Ender, tired and angry at this unwinninable situation, comes up with a desperate plan. He forms his ships into a tight-knit group and sends them directly at the planet. When they are finally in range, Ender orders the use of the MD Device against the plant itself, destroying the simulated planet and all ships in orbit. Ender consciously makes this decision knowing that it is expressly against the respectable rules of war, thinking that his teachers will find his ruthlessness unacceptable and remove him from command.

Ender removes himself from the simulator after the game and finds that everyone in the room is rejoicing. It is revealed to Ender that every battle he has been fighting against Mazer was actually a real battle taking place in bugger space. The military sent ships at the bugger planets many years ago, and outfitted them with borrowed bugger technology, making instantaneous communication possible. Ender realizes that he just ordered the actual destruction of an entire race, and the guilt of those lives forces him into a four-day coma.

When he awakens, its revealed to him that Ender is being heralded as the saviour of the human race, and now that the bugger threat has been eliminated, mankind is expanding into the empty bugger planets and repealing the population laws. Valentine arrives at command school and convinces Ender to go with her on the first ship leaving for colonization. When they arrive on the bugger world, Ender finds a large constructed statue resembling images he saw in the fantasy game. As he walks through a cave nearby he discovers a single cocoon, the last unborn bugger queen. He resolves to atone for his destruction by finding a place to resurrect this bugger queen, bringing the alien life back into existence. The unborn queen shares a psychic link with Ender, and she is able to communicate that they didn't understand that humans were sentient creatures, and their defeat during the Second Invasion forced them to realize humanity's true nature, and they had resolved to never attack Earth again. Ender writes of the compassion and pain of the bugger race and titles his book The Hive Queen (which later becomes The Hive Queen and the Hegemon), and signs it "Speaker for the Dead." HolyMadjai 20:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I've replaced this summary into the page. HolyMadjai 20:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

This page has been vandalized at least twice, most recently on 1/31/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Ice Inside (talk • contribs) 12:39, 31 January 2007

You'll find that's not too unusual for most articles on Wikipedia. Thank you for correcting the problem, however! -- Antepenultimate 20:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Who did the damn halo vandalism to the opening bit of the plot? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.187.244 (talk) 07:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Children of the Mind

Why isn't there a article on the last book? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.160.129.109 (talk)

Children of the Mind QueenStupid 15:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

I just spent some time completing and tweaking the infobox - any edition-specific information now reflects the first edition (as is preffered). I also replaced the image - actually reverting it back to what it was before, apparently, at least according to the image's previous edit summary and caption here. It appears somebody went in for some reason and replaced what was the first hardback edition image (preffered) with some random later edition paperback - and then failed to change the caption, still claiming it to be the first edition. Also, the image was completely unsourced and technically in danger of being deleted at any time anyway. I've fixed all that. I've also moved the "plot warning" template to the top of the page, as it is worded to be placed as such if need be. It was causing quite an ugly whitespace gap (especially after I expanded the infobox). Really, I'm not sure if that warning is totally justified (the summary is a tad long, but looks to be well written and this is a fairly important novel), but I don't think that's for me to decide. -- Antepenultimate 00:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I would want the plot warning. The summary is a spoiler. Una Smith 22:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler tags should not be included in sections covering plot summaries, according to WP:SPOIL.Pmcalduff (talk) 01:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

References

For references, are we allowed to cite the book the article's about? --Cheeesemonger 13:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh. Apparently we are. It would be nice if someone who had the book would do that. I just have it on tape. --Cheeesemonger 13:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I have a question. In Ender's Game on page 117(chapter 8 towards the end) it talks about Bonzo's misuse of Ender and how all the other armies had learned that getting out of their gate as fast as possible was the best idea. But, wasn't it Rose De Nose who ordered Ender to instantly come out of the gate on page 105 so wasn't it supposed to be Rose's mistake not Bonzo's on page 117?

This page is technically discussing the article about the book, not the book itself. (But a lot of the fan sites think that this passage was a mistake. :-D) --Cheeesemonger 18:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Mormonism

I see that this article has been categorized as "Portrayals of Mormons in Popular Media". Now I know Orson Scott Card is himself a Mormon, but beyond that, I don't remember anything having to do with Mormonism in this novel, but it's been a very long time since I read it. Can anybody shed some light on this? If the only connection to Mormonism is the religious orientation of the author, I don't think this article should be included in that category. Thanks -- Antepenultimate 17:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ender's parents disobeyed the state by having more than two children. I gather that having many children is an important aspect of this religion. Ender's family seems Mormon in other respects as well, although this is not stated explicitly. (Why borrow trouble?) See also Speaker for the Dead. Una Smith 22:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it is said that Ender's mother, Theresa Wiggin, is Mormon and his father, John Paul Wiggin is a Roman Catholic. Ausir 03:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The father's catholicism is made explicitly clear in the prequels, but I cannot remember it being stated anywhere that his mother is a mormon. Raul654 03:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Wasn't it stated in Teacher's Pest? Ausir 08:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the book states that his parents are ordered by the State to have another child (Ender) because their two previous children were close to what they wanted, but not close enough. You may have felt this was them breaking the law because the book also states that having more than two children is considered wrong and innapropriate due to the law and population control.

Ender's parents were indeed ordered by the state to have a "third". Further, it is briefly mentioned in this book that both his Catholic father and Mormon mother renounced their respective religions, because they were ashamed that their families were "non-compliant" (had more than two children). One character states as fact that the feelings Ender's parents have towards their respective religions are ambiguous, despite the fact that they both refuse to admit where they were born (Poland and Utah), lest people suspect their family to be non-compliant. So, one character in this book is mentioned to come from a Mormon family, but hides that fact for fear of persecution. While not a central theme to the book, I imagine it has some significance to Mormons. I'd suggest that that would qualify as Mormon depiction. Temple 10:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a point of trivia rather than a significant factor in the book. I really don't think Ender's grandparents being Mormon merits inclusion in the category. (In contrast to many of OSC's other books.) Scott.wheeler 23:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes - I found it odd that this article has the Mormonism WikiProject at the top. I can understand Card's article, but why this book. It has nothing to do with the religion. Morphh ^(talk) 2:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I do believe it’s important, enders parents religious beliefs are the driving force behind his parents allowing themselves to let him go, and also speaks to enders own detachment from his parents. His mother Mormon, his father catholic; both are running from non-compliant families. However, deep down both find shame in their unwillingness to embrace their heritage and have large families. Then the government asks them to have a ‘third’, ender. They see ender as a way to circumvent non-compliance but in the end they discover that ender is not an act of faith in their religions, but a further act of compliance with their government as well as way to ease their own minds, but nothing more. So ender himself feels distant from his parents, who hold him at arm’s length because he has become a symbol of the fact that they dare not practice their religion the way they want. Ender, in turn, does not bond well with them, instead choosing to bond with Valentine. Therefore, his mother being Mormon is the largest driving force to ender choosing to go to battle school and is in fact very important to the story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.237.170.25 (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Criticism section

The criticism section isn't really explicitly criticism, it's merely stating a fact about the book. Unless you consider "moralistic" to be intrinsically a criticism... I'm going to remove it for now, though it probably deserves its own section eventually, describing the "Moral Philosophy" of the book. Timbatron 16:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

How about the essay by Elaine Radford, which appeared in Fantasy Review in 1987 ... she argued that Ender's Game was an apologia for Adolf Hitler, and noted several parallels between the character's and the dictator's lives.[1][2][3]Steve 13:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The "criticism" that existed on the page until today was a one-sentence uncited remark from some user about parents reading the book first. That may or may not be good advice (certainly reasonable people will disagree), but it's not the type of specific criticism that would belong on a Wikipedia article - otherwise, I suppose we can go out and add the same "criticism" to about 300,000 other books... BlackberryLaw 17:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Ender Will Save Us All

I think I am going to remove the reference to the "Ender Will Save Us All" song, as that song really has nothing to do with the book (apparently it was named this way due to the lead singer's name being Ender). Thoughts? enderminh 23:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

whether or not the reference is intentional, it is a fair bit of trivia if nothing else. someone should just ask him-_- 142.167.237.127 00:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The song is referencing the fact that the lead singer (whose name is not Ender) gave a copy of Ender's Game to a friend of his, and it rekindled their dying friendship. HolyMadjai 21:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Translations

I believe this book deserves more detailed translations section with translated titels and (if needed) round-trip translations, as it was done for Terry Pratchet's books, for example ("Soul Music", "Sourcery", etc.) This is important information for the book which was translated in so many languages. Verdi1 05:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you also add in the translation for the Russian title? Pnkrockr 14:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, I did it (it is a literal translation) Verdi1 16:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Ender's Game Merger

Scratch the merger -- the information is already contained elsewhere. I've shifted the other article to a speedy delete request. --Mhking 02:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler tags

In the interest of preventing an edit war before one starts, spoiler tags should not be included in sections covering plot summaries, according to WP:SPOIL. Pnkrockr 14:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The spoiler tage screws up the page layout. I tried fixing it but I reverted it since I only made it worse.--Cadet hastings 15:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

A lot of things not revealed until the very end, are revealed here. Glad I finished reading the book before reading this page. Someone who knows how to add a spoiler tag properly, should stick one in. Do you normally give out the ending of a book for Wikipedia pages? Are there any rules about that? Does it kind of ruin it for anyone that might want to know about the book, to decide whether to read it or not? Dream Focus (talk) 17:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler tags should not be included in sections covering plot summaries, according to WP:SPOIL.Pmcalduff (talk) 01:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored in any way, including spoilers. ~QuasiAbstract {talk/contrib} 08:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Wolfgang P. or Ridley S. = "just talk"

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/070419s.php

Gruesome Game

The game that ender plays in the game room is currently described in this article. It is currently said that he stops because the images become too gruesome, but in the actual story it seems to be that he stops because he finally wins (Valentine is with him, even though the other faces are Peter). Thoughts? PeEll 21:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. In the book he quits at times for various reasons, but always got started again, until finally defeating it, overcoming his fear of Peter. That should be changed. Dream Focus (talk) 00:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Another error

The article seems to imply that he writes The Hive Queen after The Hegemon. I seem to recall that the only reason he initially wrote The Hegemon is because Peter read The Hive Queen, understood immediately that Ender had written it, and then asked Ender to write his story too. If I've gotten this wrong please correct me, otherwise someone should fix the article. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 23:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Just finished it last night, so hopefully I now what I'm talking about :) I understood that he first wrote The Hive Queen because he felt emotional about the Hive Queen's death, and he was very close to the queen (which came about through his destruction of her, and the thoughts she gave him) Then he wrote The Hegemon later, because he felt emotional about Peter's death, and he was very close to Peter. I wouldn't say that one brought about the other, they're completely separate events. 88.7.76.21 (talk) 09:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe it was clarified in Shadow of the Giant. "And so Peter had written to Valentine, congratulating her, but also asking her to invite Ender to write about him." He wanted a truthful account written after reading "The Hive Queen." ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 09:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Impact segment

In the impact segment, it has recently been added that Card noticed similarities in the Harry Potter series to Ender's Game. But if you actually read the article, it is easy to see that he is Lampooning Rowling for what he sees as a childish lawsuit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.178.204 (talk) 13:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Plot mistake

"When he awakens, it's revealed to Ender that he is being heralded as the savior of the human race, and that the bugger threat has been eliminated, mankind is expanding into the empty bugger planets and repealing the population limit laws."
The bold part is wrong - he learned that immediately after the battle ended. Would anyone like to correct this? Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 17:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

It actually is true, to Earth in general. The bugger "threat" had been eliminated. It's also true in the sense that he's being "heralded as the savior of the human race." Humans believe him to be, whether it's true or not. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 09:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Publication date

My copy says copyright 1977,1985,1991 at the start, but the article says 1985. What gives? Was it published in 77 or 85 originally? Kayamon (talk) 09:10, 3 November 2008 (UTC) This book is the best book ever!!! =*) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.92.231 (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ender's Game/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

• Before Jclemens says anything in his official review, I must point out that the 4 lists in the middle of article are lame, and sufficient grounds for quickly failing GA for bad prose/organization. So please replace the lists with some prose to introduce those plot elements. Xasodfuih (talk) 04:27, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
• Also "Ender's Game (1985) is the best-known novel by Orson Scott Card." is an opening sentence that even in a middle-school essay would be embarrassing. Xasodfuih (talk) 04:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
• And awards should be mentioned in the lede instead of book revisions. No offense, but this article seems written by very immature editor that focuses on less relevant details and lacks perspective. Xasodfuih (talk) 04:41, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I probably won't get to a detailed review of this until this weekend. Feel free to leave more comments, or go ahead and review the entire thing if you have time and inclination. Jclemens (talk) 23:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the references in this article, I see they're mostly news from the entertainment industry about the movie or some other adaptation. I don't see anything resembling a literary criticism source that discusses the novel in depth. A GA does not need to be comprehensive, but I think that having an article that's plot + list of characters + list awards + adaptations is the wrong way to portray a novel. I recommend failing this GAN until this is addressed. Xasodfuih (talk) 14:58, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I do not see the problem with this. You seem to be suggesting that there needs to be something brilliant about the article for it to pass. The article covers basically all there is to cover about the novel without breaching WP:OR and discussing symbolism and themes. Once again, the article covers the general areas of Ender's Game, and for an example of a Featured Article about a book that has a similarly written article you can look at Halo: Contact Harvest. While the article is perhaps better polished than the Ender's Game article, that is to be expected because that article is featured while this one is merely attempting to reach good article status. Could you perhaps give some advice on how to improve the article rather than saying how poorly written it is? Malinaccier P. (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, this is my opinion. Leaving aside that the editor behind Halo: Contact Harvest pretty much admits to writing it to get the mop, that article is no great example if you ask me: 60% of that FA is a lengthy plot summary. But at least it doesn't have lengthy bullet lists, and it has some details on critical reception and some of the author's ruminations. Anyway, Jclemens is running this GA, so it's his call. Xasodfuih (talk) 23:21, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Hatnote seems kind of iffy--why is it needed? If it is needed, make it less redundant, but it seems like a See Also would be sufficient. Listing of sequels in the lead are neither chronological by publication date nor alphabetically--why? Lead length is fine. It's been a while since I've read the book, but the plot summary seems to include a lot of things not central to the book. Passive voice is used too frequently.

   Y Hatnote sent to "See also," sequels reorganized, passive voice changed to active in the plot summary. Malinaccier (talk) 03:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are more sources for the potential movie than anything else. This really needs some independent RS on commentary about the book, and less plot summary. For example, see "http://www.sfnewmexican.com/Teen/-Ender-s-Game--a-masterpiece-to-put-your-mind-in-a-spin" for the sort of thing I think needs to be added. There are lot more commentaries where that came from. IMDb is not an official source for anything.

   Y I've created a "Critical response section" with sources from commentaries from sources such as NYtimes. Malinaccier (talk) 03:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   See above comments--needs more literary reaction and less plot summary.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Seems a bit fannish. Hard to put a specific finger on it, but the overall feel is one of a fans writing about a favored book, not of detatched appraisal.

   In the critical response section I've dedicated a lot of writing to negative responses to the novel, but I'm unsure if this has fully solved the problem. Malinaccier (talk) 03:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for up to a week for improvements. I'm leaving the country Friday, so I will review this Thursday, and either pass it, fail it, or extend the hold for another week, based on the progress against these recommendations. Jclemens (talk) 23:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Additional comments: Category "Ender's Game series novels" should be a list, rather than a category, since it's finite and completion is possible. Fact is, looks like the list article already exists. Jclemens (talk) 23:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll look into it. Malinaccier (talk) 03:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it turned out fine. It could use a bit more copyediting, but my main points about the content have been addressed. Minor quibbles:

• The inspiration for the ansible comes out as a bit of a "huh" trivia in the creation section. Perhaps move it somewhere in the setting section and mention it parenthetically.

•  Done. Malinaccier (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... as of now" in should probably be avoided in the adaptations section.

•  Done. Malinaccier (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

• In the critical response section "On the other hand, there have been several negative reviews" doesn't strike me as the right transition because the NYT review right before it was also fairly negative. Perhaps you intended to label that as a mixed review and contrast it with wholly negative reviews? Xasodfuih (talk) 14:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Done. Malinaccier (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

1/16 re-review Grr. I just wrote up a detailed review, and then my browser ate it. I'm probably not going to get to redo it before I leave for a week, so hold is extended until I return.

High points:

• Call it science fiction in the lead

•  Done. Scapler (talk) 21:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

• "It is set in Earth's future where mankind has barely survived two conflicts with the Formics (an insectoid alien race also known as the "Buggers") and the International Fleet is preparing for war." Too much information, awkward and redundant--why do we care about an International fleet? If mankind has barely survived an interplanetary war, naming earth is redundant.
• "In order to find and train the eventual commander for the anticipated third invasion, the world's most talented children, including the extraordinary Ender Wiggin, are taken into a training center known as the Battle School at a very young age and trained in the arts of war through increasingly difficult games." Awkward, too long and complex.
• Second lead paragraph needs to clarify that the series didn't immediately follow the novelette.

•  Done. Simplified the sentences, and performed a copyedit. Further, I have clarified the IF's significance. However, I do believe it is appropriate to mention that it is earth's future, rather than another setting created for a sci-fi universe. Scapler (talk) 22:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Structure:

• Move Creation after Synopsis? I like plot to follow lead, just a preference, though--do what reads best.

Comment - I believe it reads better to surround the plot with real world info, like you said, just a preference. Scapler (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the creation section before the plot gives some context. Xasodfuih (talk) 02:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Plot Summary:

• Almost every sentence needs some work.
• "Upon departure for Battle School, the Battle School commander, Hyrum Graff, immediately singles out Ender as the most intelligent student." Upon departure for or arrival at?
• "Ender gains the reputation of an elite soldier and becomes ranked top of all the soldiers in battle school." Gains a reputation is awkward. Capitalize Battle School consistently throughout. Use "children" or "child soldiers" instead of soldiers in the final clause--emphasize that the school is made up of kids.

•  Done. I have copyedited the whole article as a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, so the article as a whole should read better now. Scapler (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's a quickie rehash of a detailed review. You're much closer than you were, the improvements are showing, but more copyediting is still needed. The critical reception section is a great add. I'll be back 1/24, and will look at what you've done then. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The lede could use more attention. The first paragraph was a half-plot summary with awards tagged awkwardly at the end of it. I've tweaked it a bit, but it still needs a rewrite to make any sense to someone not familiar with the novel. Xasodfuih (talk) 02:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments. Right away I see problems with the lead paragraph. Focusing on it:

• The first paragraph has words based on the root 'expand' occur twice in the same sentence and it has words based on 'update' occur twice in the same sentence. Get thee to a thesaurus.

•  Done Scapler (talk) 21:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Don't mention 'Formic' in the first paragraph--wait until the second para where the wikilink is. The first para should say something like "intergalactic wars" or "alien wars" or similar.

•  Done Good catch on both of these Scapler (talk) 21:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• The chronological progression in the first paragraph isn't complete. There's a sentence about 1977, a glaring gap where it should discuss the early '80s when the novelette became a novel, a void during the mid-80s when the book was gaining popular and critical success, and then the 1991 update could be brought in. If such a chronological sequence isn't desired for the first paragraph, take all that stuff out and put it in the third paragraph. Keep the author/book real world timeline together.

Comment - I do not believe that the lead should necessarily be arranged chronologically. As it exists now, it flows quite logically: Origin, Plot, Reception and adaptations. In my opinion, this works fine. Scapler (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• No need for Soviet Union in the first paragraph. Just say the book was updated to keep in step with current events. Save the details for later. Binksternet (talk) 12:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Done

1/24 Re-review Still a lot of awkward things that needed copyediting, so I did 'em. Passed per improvements. Jclemens (talk) 22:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Differences between novel and short story?

Should there be a section about the differences between the novel and the short story? They are actually rather significant.