Talk:Farrar, Straus and Giroux

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Pronunciation

It would be nice if someone included the pronunciation!

Importance of the firm

Shouldn't the first sentence of the lede mention what the firm is known for (its history of publishing famous authors)? Jsolinsky (talk) 17:35, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence should explain what Farrar, Straus and Giroux is, i.e. an American publisher. Later in the lede it mentions their famous authors, but that claim is currently tagged as lacking third-party references, so it may be removed. If you can find a good reference or a particularly apposite quote describing their reputation and their authors' fame, by all means include it in the lede (as long as the reference/quotation isn't from the company or associated parties). --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lists

I will say it again: lists of authors in a publisher article should ONLY be those authors exclusively published by them, otherwise, the proper list is of individual books. if John Author has 10 books from FSG, and 2 from Scribners, his name shouldnt be listed with either publisher, but his books should be listed. get it?(mercurywoodrose)99.23.83.234 (talk) 16:57, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • That does not make sense. Authors may work for a number of authors or the publisher they write for may be acquired. It seems that if a publisher is known as the author's publisher they should warrant a mention, regardless of whether they have written at other publishers.

North Point

Doesn't North Point Press merit its own page, given that the company existed for a number of years and established its own reputation before becoming subsumed into FSG? 850 C (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

of course it does. the coverage of book publishers here is ludicrous. the lists of authors (not books) is an absurd act of self promotion, and the lack of historical documentation of which house first published which works of literature is an orwellian erasure of history. god damn any editor who contributes to this cacophony. better to just write "Mostly Harmless" for the content of the publisher articles.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:18, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History is where?

Roger Williams Straus Jr.#Publisher provides more history than does Farrar, Straus and Giroux#Early years. --P64 (talk) 16:08, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Farrar,_Straus_and_Giroux"