Talk:The Rules of Attraction

Novels Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Novels portal 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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

This is not related to the article about the book, but to the book. I just got a copy of it from the library, and I believe there are some pages missing in the beginning. It starts in the middle of a sentence: and it's a story that might bore you but you don't have to listen, she told me, because she always knew it was going to be like that, and it was, she thinks, her first year, or, actually weekend, really a Friday, in September, at Camden,... since I know Ellis has used incomplete sentences in later works (e.g. in American Psycho), I am not certain this actually is a missing page, but I guess someone here has the book and can inform me about it. Ellipse 22:33, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's a good thing you pointed this out, because I forgot to add it to the article. The book begins with only a partial sentence, which Ellis did on purpose. The point is to bring the reader in in the middle of the action, rather than the beginning. -- LGagnon 22:39, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply (Wikipedia never seems to stop amazing me by quick replies/updates). I was actually able to use Amazon's Look Inside service to find out before I saw your reply, but thanks anyway.Ellipse 13:01, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Secret History

"The protagonists of Donna Tartt's 1992 novel The Secret History are referenced by 'Stuart'" How can they be referenced if this book was published in 1987? Is it just a coincidence? -Fetology 21:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds suspect. I'm removing it until someone can give a reference to prove it. -- LGagnon 21:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Before we start a pointless revert war, can someone explain why that text had to be deleted? The summary box exists so that things like this won't happened. -- LGagnon 17:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expand?

Hey, i've never edited wikipedia before, and dont really know what im doing. But considering (IMO) the book is much much better than then film, does there deserve to be more info about the book than the film other than charater overview? More on plot, analysis, etc.

Could somebody but a stub or expand tag on the page? Thanks. =D

70.238.246.3 05:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Charlie[reply]

Worst wiki article ever?

Seriously, someone needs to do a re-write. I've only read the book once, so couldn't possibly ;-) but this article is POV, contains original research, is largely unsourced and is about as encyclopedic as....something very unencyclopedic. Sort it out!! 82.19.66.37 20:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]