Talk:Apollyon (novel)

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Novels Mid‑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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Scorpion-Demon-Locust Things

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I remember seeing on a National Geographic documentary once (Book of Revelations, I think it was called) that the locust-like creatures of the fifth-trumpet-angel-judgment-God-wrath thing or whatever were likely meant as metaphors by the writer (the real writer of Revelation, not those hacks LaHaye and Jenkins), possibly describing helicopters in the best way someone of his time could. I'm not going to provide a quote or citing or anything because I'm not that technical, and I don't care that much, but does anyone know what I'm talking about? If so, should we make some mention or comparison of that in this article? It deserves at least a one-liner. --206.82.93.235 23:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

This is to discuss improving the article, not to editorialize as you have here by calling the authors "backs." You have been warned.

Proof-reading

This is the first time I've tried to add to a talk page, but I found the grammar in this page to be poor to the point of incomprehensibility. I might have taken a stab at editing to correct, but at some points it is confusing enough that 'correction' might actually be changing the intended meaning. Changing tenses, possessions and sentence structure all distract the reader from the content and the message of this author. I've been reading wikipedia for years and this is easily the sloppiest entry I have seen to date! (I've never consumed any of the left-behind media, so I can't comment on the content of this page itself...) 14:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 57.66.141.2 (talk)

References and sources

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

At the risk of sounding dense, why does the synopsis of a novel need to cite "references and sources"? Silver Shiney (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic