Talk:Nancy Drew/Archive 1

Archive 1

Dana Girls question

How (and than what) is The Dana Girls series "more accurate"? --Calieber 22:12, Oct 27, 2003 (UTC)

I edited that bit. Left a note on your page. Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 21:39, 2005 August 23 (UTC)

Concur with removal of external link

Per Wikipedia external links guideline, I concur with removal of the external link The Unofficial Nancy Drew Home Page as constituting advertising. Please do not add this link back! -- Sitearm | Talk 17:26, 2005 August 23 (UTC)

I disagree. I visited the site in question and found it informative and concise. Please leave that link alone in the future.--Flonga 20:10, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. The site has no value and the web page owner IS a link spammer. 152.163.101.9 15:38, 2005 August 23

NOTE: User:152.163.101.9 is an IP address used by an unknown person to leave comments. -- Sitearm | Talk 00:15, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

May I recommend you create an account to log in for discussions? Anonymous contributions and discussions are OK but a registered username avoids confusion of your input with that of other users coming in on that IP address. -- SitearmTalk 21:36, 2005 August 23 (UTC)

The "advertising" on the site in coincidental to the wealth of information provided therein. If you wish to continue discussing this issue you should really register as a user. As it stands now you just seem like an anonymous crank with a personal axe to grind.--Flonga 23:03, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Flonga has less than 20 edits - all concurring with interests of FWDixon--PhilipO 02:02, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Flonga is a FWDixon/Bob Finnan sockpuppet. See [[1]] for discussion about User FWDixon/Bob Finnan's link spamming and plagiarism. User:64.12.117.9 11:36, 2005 August 24

NOTE: User:64.12.117.9 is an IP address used by an unknown person to leave comments. -- Sitearm | Talk 00:12, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

This user Finnan is a link spammer who has more than 100 links from the Hardy Boys and all of the different Hardy Boys series and titles, Tom Swift, Stratemeyer Syndicate, Grosset & Dunlap, X Bar X Boys, Radio Boys, Edward Stratemeyer, Harriet Stratemeyer, Nancy Drew, and on and on. This should not be allowed. 205.188.117.68 13:06, 2005 August

NOTE: User:205.188.117.68 is an IP address used by an unknown person to leave comments. -- Sitearm | Talk 00:12, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

For this article the link removed is not an essential contribution. For your other concerns may I recommend you create an account to log in for discussions? Anonymous contributions and discussions are OK but a registered username avoids confusion of your input with that of other users coming in on that IP address. Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 18:21, 2005 August 23 (UTC)

I consider the link in question advertisment and it should be removed. --PhilipO 02:02, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

• Why then, one might ask, would you leave the link to the Simon & Schuster site? A site which is purely commercial and exists for the sole purpose to sell their books! Aren't you being just a tad hypocritical?--FWDixon 22:07, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

• Unless Simon & Schuster are the publishers, remove that link too, that's what I say. --PhilipO 22:28, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Consistent Nancy Drew categorizations

I noticed two categorizations being used on the book articles: Category:Nancy Drew and Category:Nancy Drew books. I think the second category is too detailed for this specialized topic of interest. The first category covers what's needed for now. -- Sitearm | Talk 03:19, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

Page history check

• The Simon and Schuster link was added by User:Bevo 12:32, 2005 January 11 with the link label Nancy Drew titles with current edition cover art. The article text said: in the early 1990s, a new series of books were created for Simon & Schuster, under the new epithet The Nancy Drew Files. I checked Bevo's user page and as far as I can tell Bevo does not work for Simon & Schuster. So a reasonable assumption is that Bevo added the link as a verifiable citation for a fact stated in the article text.

• Three fan site links were removed by User:Djsasso on 00:47, 2005 June 15 and 00:49, 2005 June 15 with no Edit Summary. User:Djsasso's contributions show lots of edits on lots of different articles.

• The first addition of the Bob Finnan fan site link was by User:4.236.54.116 on 06:18, 2005 June 19. Checking contributions for User:4.236.54.116 shows that the Bob Finnan fan site link was added to a total of 72 Wikipedia article pages. A reasonable assumption is that this was a deliberate act of link spamming.

More on the link spamming and commercial advertising. Example http://hardyboys.bobfinnan.com/hbpb.htm is just a list of titles that all have links to Amazon. All of the books summaries were copied from Amazon. Every HB Digest title, Casefiles title, Clues Brothers title, Supermysteries title, Ultra Thriller title and so on has a link to Amazon and all summaries were copied from Amazon. Does that tell anyone something?

Yep, tells us you're lying! Here's a link to Amazon's Ultra Thriller page (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671756613/ref=nosim) and not a summary to be seen. Ditto for everything else. BTW, thanks for all the links to my site, I'm sure it will increase readership! :)--FWDixon 14:21, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Retention of external link

• A consensus has been reached to retain on Nancy Drew one external link to the Unofficial Nancy Drew Home Page. Discussions are archived here and here.

-- Sitearm | Talk 16:04, 2005 August 27 (UTC)

Finnan's ND pages are all commercial. Every single title for the series and spin off series has a Buy It Now link. There is almost no content and what little he put there was copied from a book called Farrah's Guide. Was this really looked at?

NOTE: The above comment was posted by registered user Swiftfan 16:25, 2005 August 27

RESPONSE: Yes, extensively, including discussion about your comments. Do look at the archive links above, that's what they're there for. P.S. Please sign your posts using ~~~~. Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 23:00, 2005 August 27(UTC)

The authors info on Finnan's ND site original series was copied from www.keeline.com/Nancy_Drew.pdf Everything else is just Buy It Now links to 80 or so book titles. Pages for the spin off series have no content either. This is obviously link spamming for commercial gain. 69.205.1.91 11:48, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

RESPONSE:If I understand you correctly, you assert that an external web site has copied another external web site's material. May I recommend that you take this up with the webmasters of the sites concerned, not here? If you think an actual article on Wikipedia contains unpermitted copied material, may I recommend you follow the Wikipedia procedure detailed here. But a caveat, the Wikipedia procedure is only for content on Wikipedia article pages, not for content on external web sites. -- Sitearm | Talk 16:08, 2005 August 28 (UTC)coolio!

Hi Sitearm. This makes sense but what about the link spamming and commercial nature of the web site. The complaint is that there is almost no information or content on the page and what there is was plagiarized from another source. That aside the web page is mainly just a title list set up buy links to Amazon. There is a history of link spamming for commercial purposes with this user. Thank you for your response. 69.205.1.91 18:03, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Instead of another edit war I recommend the description following the link to The Unofficial Nancy Drew Page be changed to: commercial site with little information on the series. Reason is above. Compare to other links and judge for yourself. 69.205.1.91 21:26, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

The "little information" part is PoV in my opinion. This is why I was reverting your edits. I wouldn't have done it if you had just sad "commercial site". Anyway. I'll leave it as as at the moment pending further discussion. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:30, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks. 69.205.1.91 21:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

I changed the word "fan" to "commericial". -- Sitearm | Talk 14:23, 2005 August 31 (UTC)

Archive

Previous discussions on this page have been archived

• Talk:Nancy Drew/Archive_1

-- Sitearm | Talk 16:04, 2005 August 27 (UTC)

Too many Internet Book List external links

I have reduced the six Internet Book List external links to one. Six was way too many. The article is about Nancy Drew, not the Internet Book List. -- Sitearm | Talk 01:41, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Melanie Rehak book

For anyone who is seriously working on this article:

• Melanie Rehak, Girl Sleuth: Nancy Drew and the Women Who Created Her. Harcourt, 2005. Reviewed by Brenda Wineapple: Nancy Has Two Mommies, The Nation, posted November 30, 2005 (December 19, 2005 issue).

Jmabel | Talk 10:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

"For girls"

Not only does it seem quite sexist to me (I have read a Nancy Drew book), it seems to mean that it restricts the male part of the world form reading the books. It is aimed at girls, of course, but does not necessarily mean that member of the opposite sex are restricted from reading it; that's why I removed both words. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 19:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I used to read Nancy Drew - it was much more interesting then the male version 'The Hardy Boys'. And I am male. 68.43.91.73

Links to Books and Games

I think combining the links to the books and computer games is necessary. It's mostly duplicates with small alterations. Morhange 00:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Similarities in text to another website

This article is at times word-for-word with an Angelfire site written in the same colloquial style. I don't know who copied whom, but I suggest we work on rewording the text here and wikifying the article to emulate Wikipedia style. Cheers, --Marysunshine 22:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Also...there's almost no mention of the history behind the post-hardcover books! What about the Nancy Drew Files? Does anyone have informaion about those?--Marysunshine 23:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Nancy's wealth

It says that earlier, Nancy was clearly affluent, but less so later on. Can this be further explained? Also, does it say anywhere in the series how Nancy managed to solve the crimes without getting paid for them and without getting a job in between ... jobs? :P SKS2K6 06:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

nancy drew?

what is NANCY DREW- secret in the stars about? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.161.42.216 (talk) 22:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

This really isn't supposed to be a discussion about the series, but the back of the book says:

Nancy and George are thrilled when Bob "Dr. Stars" Steller, a cool astronomer with a popular radio program, comes to River Heights for the Perseid meteor shower. Bess goes into orbit when she learns that a Hollywood heartthrob and his girlfriend are also in town secretly.

But when Nancy finds Steller's van deserted and runs into a hostile rival of the astronomer, she senses a dangerous black hole in the event. Then Dr. Steller finally appears -- or is he an optical illusion? As Nancy uncovers more evidence, her suspicions lead her into a sinister scheme moving faster than the speed of light!'

24.183.40.221 00:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Series

This article is clearly about the character. Is there an article about the series?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew5.jpg

Image:NancyDrew5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew4.jpg

Image:NancyDrew4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew2.jpg

Image:NancyDrew2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew.jpg

Image:NancyDrew.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler

I just deleted a part that said "Culprits: DO NOT READ IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW, COMMON SENSE PEOPLE!!" --Krista— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.72.234.172 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Type of Detective

What type of detective is Nancy Drew (I've never read any)? The article just states that she's a detective, but as she's often portrayed as a teenager, I presume she's not a police officer. Would it not be more accurate to describe her as a private detective or an amateur sleuth? Blaise Joshua 09:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hannah Gruen

Hannah must approve menus and special duties with Nancy, although it is difficult to imagine that as a child Nancy gave orders to a maid. I disagree with this. There is precedence for teenage girls being technically mistress of their households as early as 13 in Jane Austen. Specifically, Emma Woodhouse in Emma and Elizabeth Elliott in Persuasion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.243.146.81 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

"Woopties"

I'm not an expert on Nancy Drew, but I had to do something about the description of Nancy's earliest friend Helen that placed her in the "woopties". I have no idea what that means, and suspect it's vandalism. If by chance I've introduced an error (I looked up the separate entry for Helen, which is how I found out about her marriage) by all means correct it, but don't put back "woopties" unless you can substantiate it, thanks. Accounting4Taste 21:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:10LarkspurLanePopUp.jpg

Image:10LarkspurLanePopUp.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Lily Tesquort 4 the Food

You Rock!Whats up.

Your Homie G.Lily TesQuort —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.119.144 (talk) 19:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew.jpg

Image:NancyDrew.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew2.jpg

Image:NancyDrew2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew3.jpg

Image:NancyDrew3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew4.jpg

Image:NancyDrew4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NancyDrew5.jpg

Image:NancyDrew5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Werewolf in a Winter Wonderland

Werewolf in a Winter Wonderland needs some major cleaning up and editing. If you have some time, give it a go. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 14:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Removing some repetitive info

Unless someone objects, I think I'll soon be bold and remove the lists of Files, etc., as the lists are also available on the primary pages for those series. Ricardiana (talk) 08:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Neutral point of view; original research

The more I think about it, the more I think that this article, especially the "Character evolution" section, violates Wikipedia's policies on neutral point of view and especially on original research. I think that that whole section, including maybe the bit I added about 80s, 90s, and 2000s Nancy, may have to be completely re-written in order to incorporate citations. --Another problem with the section is that it's really only about the Nancy Drew Mystery Stories, as it stands, so it needs either to be moved to the Nancy Drew Mystery Stories page, or to incorporate some discussion of another incarnation of Nancy, most obviously Girl Detective. Files Nancy would be good as well. Ricardiana (talk) 17:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on an overview of Nancy's evolution that incorporates a lot of sources - Rehak, Plunkett-Powell, Kismaric & Heiferman, etc. I was also thinking of adding a new section to discuss Nancy's visual evolution - a lot of the current "Character evolution" section is about Nancy's portrayal, and I think that might work better in its own section. Maybe we can add more pictures, too....Ricardiana (talk) 21:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominated for Good Article status

Here's hoping!

Also, fyi: some of the images have a dispute tag on them. For more info about that and what I've done to handle the initial flag on those images, please see User talk:Ricardiana and the media questions page. Thanks. Ricardiana (talk) 19:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Reason why Nancy does not go to school

The article says "Nancy does not go to school (for reasons that are never explained)", but the article itself suggests just three paragraphs earlier that the reason is that she is out for the summer ("[Nancy lives] in an endless summer"). I'm not familiar enough with the subject or the sources to make an edit on this point, but I think it should be resolved. —Christian Campbell 06:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason for the discrepancy is that the source is wrong, or not so much wrong as faux-poetic. The books take place sometimes in winter, but the source wants to convey the fact that time never really seems to pass, and so uses the metaphor of an endless summer. In any case, I'll add something to clarify the quotation. Best, Ricardiana (talk) 13:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, I am not familiar enough with the subject, so this is intended as general third-party meddling helpfulness, but if winter is the only other time of setting, that is still congruent with being on school break. Is there specific evidence that Nancy's relationship to school was unlike her readers'? —Christian Campbell 17:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

She never goes to school. It's as simple as that. It's also never explained why. I will find a source if possible that spells this out, but as someone who has read 200+ ND titles and all of the criticism on Drew, take it from me that this statement is a truism. Ricardiana (talk) 20:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I've added a source to address this issue. I might also add that part of what makes it clear that Nancy doesn't go to school is the fact that her boyfriend, Ned Nickerson, attends "Emerson University," and classes are sometimes in session for him when Nancy has no such obligations. But this last part is not in a source, so I'm not sure it belongs in the article. Ricardiana (talk) 05:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Article nominated for FA status

Comments are welcome. The link to the comments page is at the top of this page. Ricardiana (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

More books?

Some other books are coming out in graphic novel. I know that these books are old and not many people come to this site but we really should care and write the new books. 99.243.196.86 (talk) 16:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The graphic novels are mentioned here: Girl Detective. I will try to find a reliable source to add a quick mention of them to the main article as well. In addition, I would note that the article does talk about new books, and many people do come to this site. Ricardiana (talk) 16:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Added a mention. Ricardiana (talk) 18:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Recent changes

NDPhD, you have been making a number of changes to the article. We obviously disagree on some points, so let's discuss them.

1. You can't add a mention of the archives re: the fifth movie. That's original research. Do you have a published source?
2. Why do you keep changing the page to say that "most" of the Nancy Drew books were written by ghostwriters? All the books were written under the name Carolyn Keene; there is no Carolyn Keene. Therefore, they've all been written by ghostwriters, under the name Carolyn Keene. What part of this do you disagree with?
3. I kept some of your changes, only adding a reference with a page number to Rehak instead of the one you had to Farah, with no page number. Yet you reverted this - why?

Ricardiana (talk) 18:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Did I miss this?

Does the article mention the fact that at least in the first, blue-bound series, Nancy almost always succeeds by understanding that the sinister-looking, ill-mannered people rumored to have had money problems in the past, really are the bad guys, when others interested in the case had unwisely refrained from judging by appearence and hearsay? How about the racist/ethnic stereotypes, which prompted the publisher who reprinted the origninal THE HIDDEN STAIRCASE to preface the book with an acknowledgement and explanation that it was for historical fidelity? Actually I can post that in the article because the edition itself is the source! SingingZombie (talk) 11:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The sections on ND 1930-1959 and 1959-1979 discuss these matters. Adding the bit from the Applewood books is OK as long as you don't violate WP:OR (drawing conclusions from primary sources is not allowed), but not really necessary as there's plenty of discussion of racial and class stereotypes in the sections abovementioned. Ricardiana (talk) 01:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Nancy Drew Notebooks

There seems to be no mention of the series 'Nancy Drew Notebooks' which depict Nancy as a young girl? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.205.37 (talk) 05:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Step-brother?

I read most of the Nancy Drew books as a child. In one there is mention of a step-brother that had just been adopted by her father. But there is no mention of him here. Shouldn't there be? Kiltpin (talk) 20:23, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Excessive block quotes

Don't you think there are too many block quotes especially in the Evolution of Character section? Some of them even in the middle of a sentence. It looks weird.--Krystaleen 16:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Evolution of Character vague statements

There are some vague statements in the lede and under the above heading, mainly things like "many scholars agree", "most commentators agree", that sort of thing. These are a bit too vague for a FA and should be revised to be more specific. Who are these commentators and scholars? Where were these opinions published? I see the sentences are sourced, but the sentences should name who or what is making the statement and not require that readers look up sources to find who is making these statements. The Garbage Skow (talk) 14:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Nancy's Age

There's some confusion in the article which says that, from 1930–1959, "Nancy Drew is depicted as an independent-minded 18-year-old" and that, in 1959, "Nancy's age was raised from 16 to 18". It seems likely that the former is a typographical error based on its reference to sixteen as the minimum age of high school graduation at the time, but I hesitate to change it without confirmation and citation. Czrisher (talk) 20:42, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

changing six films to five

I'm changing the reference to "six" feature films. The text only mentions five - four with Bonita Granville plus the Emma Roberts one - plus rumors of a possible fifth Granville film. Rumors are not fact, and unless there is confirmation of another film, the total stands at five. Elsquared (talk) 06:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Drew residence

Does anyone know what architectural style Nancy's house was built in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.160.137 (talk) 00:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Biased article

This entire article has a bizarre fixation on the supposed "transformation" of Drew from strong and capable to something less than that over the years.

It's not simply mentioned as a criticism but repeatedly stressed and highlighted over and over all over the article.

There's some serious POV and agenda pushing invloved.

I don't know. If you look at the introductory paragraphs under Evolution of Character, the "transformation" is both documented by sources therefore verifying the point of view and put into context, viz., the alternative pov is also given space and explained.Aschuet1 (talk) 03:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nancy Drew. 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/20130510065205/http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/iwa/findingaids/html/BensonMildred.htm to http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/iwa/findingaids/html/BensonMildred.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:42, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Nancy Drew. 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/20160323233040/http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/cbs-nancy-drew-diverse-pilot-order-1201683223/ to http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/cbs-nancy-drew-diverse-pilot-order-1201683223/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160227114050/http://deadline.com/2016/02/drew-vanessa-ferlito-cast-cbs-nancy-drew-pilot-1201710162/ to http://deadline.com/2016/02/drew-vanessa-ferlito-cast-cbs-nancy-drew-pilot-1201710162/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160302075636/http://deadline.com/2016/02/drew-steve-kazee-cast-cbs-nancy-drew-pilot-1201711827/ to http://deadline.com/2016/02/drew-steve-kazee-cast-cbs-nancy-drew-pilot-1201711827/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160312011257/http://deadline.com/2016/03/nancy-drew-debra-monk-cast-hannah-cbs-pilot-1201716662/ to http://deadline.com/2016/03/nancy-drew-debra-monk-cast-hannah-cbs-pilot-1201716662/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:20, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nancy Drew. 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/20090406072630/http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS136657+18-Mar-2009+BW20090318 to https://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS136657+18-Mar-2009+BW20090318

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:40, 6 October 2017 (UTC)