Talk:King Ottokar's Sceptre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Untitled[edit]

Syldavian may be a Germanic language, but there's no indication about the position of the STRESS of each word. As a rule, the FIRST syllable must be stressed on most words. However, in a book entitled 'Le Tournesol Illustré', some Syldavian or Bordurian words are accompanied by a phonetic alphabet that represents the FRENCH pronunciation. The latter must be wrong. As a matter of fact, French-speaking people systematically put the stress on the LAST syllable! This has the effect of distorting the 'real' pronunciation of Syldavian or Bordurian.

Release date help needed[edit]

The official tintin website mentions the release date as 1942, conflicting with the entry. Please enlighten.--54UV1K 08:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Eneny nations[edit]

Was United States really an enemy nation when this was released? America did not get involed in the war until the end of 1941, so I can't imagine ZGermany had any quarrell with America at that time —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.213.99 (talk) 10:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

It was clear from at least 1939, and particularly from the start of the lend-lease program (when the US basically gave Britain warships to help it out) that the US was unfriendly, at best, to the Nazis. - DavidWBrooks 13:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Wink to the camera[edit]

In my book, Tintin winks to the camera in frame 2, page 62, not frame 8. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.82.145.137 (talk) 08:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

June 5 edit[edit]

The article now has spelling and grammar improvements, and as some of these humble changes were a matter of style, feel free to change back any single one of them. As long as the article is improved in the processes, I am in favour of it. Brilliant job on the state of the article now; recent edits have the article brought up to a higher quality. FYI: Bibliography is now ready for the article to contain three more citations to the following authors: Apostolidès|2010, Goddin|2010, McCarthy|2006 (if not to be, then they may be deleted from the bibliography). Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 14:06, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Cheers Prhartcom, am adding those references in now, and will then nominate for GAR. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:34, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Let me know if I can lend a hand in any way, i.e. to cite Goddin Vol. 2; I have it right here. Prhartcom (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 17:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


Review to follow soon. J Milburn (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

  • "A man who then organises to meet Tintin is found unconscious, following which the reporter receives a threatening note and then a bomb attack, which is intercepted by the police detectives Thomson and Thompson" I'm afraid I don't follow.
  • "Forcibly ejected from the plane" By whom?
    • By the pilot; I've clarified this in the prose. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm struggling to understand the utility of File:Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1976-033-20, Anschluss sudetendeutscher Gebiete.jpg
    • (talk page stalker) - if I may, this picture gives an idea of the how the political reality fed into the writer's drawings and provided visual inspiration. The same idea is also in play in several other Tintin GAs. Brigade Piron (talk) 18:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
      • I think that Brigade Piron has hit the nail right on the head there, and I second their views on the utility of this particular image. Note the similar use of such imagery over at the FA Tintin in the Land of the Soviets and the GA Tintin in America. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
        • I'd prefer an image showing the Anschluss, if possible, but I have no objection to it remaining. J Milburn (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
          • I've replaced that image with another depicting a scene of the Anschluss. Hope that looks okay ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • It'd be good if you could cite the old psychology paper
  • Why Fascist?
    • In the passage in question, I refer to the "Nazi Hitler" and the "Fascist Mussolini". Although I appreciate that there is still some debate on the matter of whether Nazism can be categorised as a form of fascism, most political analysts and historians seem to take the view that it is; thus both Hitler and Mussolini could be deemed small-f fascists. However, I chose the capital-F here to reflect that Mussolini led the National Fascist Party – I shall make this more explicit in the text itself. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:50, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "Tecnica del Colpo di Stato (The Technique of a Coup d'Etat)" For consistency with the paper names, I think you need speech marks here.
  • Eastern Europe?
    • Personally I think that it reads better being capitalised, although I recognise that others might differ from me on that. I'm happy to discuss it; are there any Wiki policies on the matter ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
      • If you're happy, I am- I note that our article capitalises, so you're probably right. J Milburn (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "The concept of a fictional East European kingdom had similarities with that of Ruritania, which appeared in Anthony Hope's novel The Prisoner of Zenda (1894) and its film adaptations in 1913, 1915, 1922, and 1937, of which Hergé might have been aware." Slightly clumsy- also, worth linking the films?
    • Agreed; I've changed the prose and added the links. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:19, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "Tintin En Syldavie (Tintin in Syldavia)" Again?
  • "Cœurs Vaillants" Probably notable enough for a redlink?
    • I'm not a fan of redlinks, but you have a point. Done. :) Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
      • I like redlinks, but I bump into more and more people who dislike them. The other option is knocking up a quick article- do you read French? J Milburn (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
        • (talk page stalker) I speak and read French, and I have created a stub of the Cœurs Vaillants article using material from the French article (and other ready sources), and I agree with J Milburn in this case that the red link was appropriate here (and in other Tintin articles), even though I am normally in agreement with Midnightblueowl about red links. Prhartcom (talk) 05:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "Hergé renamed the character Nestor Alembick to Hector Alembick because his recurring character Nestor had been introduced in The Secret of the Unicorn." Could this be rephrased? You've not mentioned that character by name yet.
    • Changed. I think that the new sentence is much clearer. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "In 1976, archaeologists discovered a sceptre belonging to a 13th-century King Ottokar in St. Vitus Cathedral, Prague.[41]" Interesting- do any of the sources say anything more about this?
    • Sadly not, and I do feel that it is a bit trivia-like... The sources only mention it because of the unusual coincidental similarities with the story. Do you think it needs inclusion ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:04, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
      • It's probably not essential, but the fact that a couple of good sources have mentioned it... You could relegate it to an end note, perhaps. I don't mind it for GA purposes, but people may gripe at FAC. Short paragraphs don't go down well, as I suspect you know! J Milburn (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
        • I might stick it in the "Critical analysis" section. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "Jean-Marc and Randy Lofficier" I don't like the way you link two names to one person's article
  • There are some tense shifts in the Critical analysis section
  • "Tintin fans would adopt the Syldavian language that appears in the story and use it to construct grammars and dictionaries, akin to the fan following of Star Trek's Klingon and Tolkien's Elvish." Very interesting point, but the tense is a little odd. Any more information about this? Any publications from linguists, for instance?

I've made a few changes- please do check them. J Milburn (talk) 18:51, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

  • They look good. Do you have further comments for this GA review? Prhartcom (talk) 12:23, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Non-free content use[edit]

  • I'm afraid I'm not seeing how File:Tintin en Syldavie.jpg meets the NFCC. While a single cover image is generally held to be OK, I can't see any reason to have a second.
    • I would argue that this particular image adds to the overall appearance of the article, and is in itself informative. As an example of why I think that it should stay, I would cite the FA-quality article on Tintin in the Land of the Soviets, where we have both an image of the book cover and an image of the original newspaper supplement in which the comic strip first appeared. Why not do the same here ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
      • At a glance, I'm surprised that got through FAC without a challenge. The question has got to be what this particular image adds to this particular article. I'm afraid "overall appearance" cannot be a justification for a non-free image. (If you want that, we have free pictures of at least some of the people you mention.) If you had some sourced analysis of the respective covers, or how the comics were advertised, or the difference in art style between the two versions then you could justify the inclusion of both covers, but without that, I'm not convinced both can be used. J Milburn (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
        • (talk page stalker) J Milburn could be right about that. The justification to use it is how clearly the image shows the original name of the adventure, before it was renamed, a fact that is mentioned in the prose. I have completed the file's description page and I wrote this justification into the image caption. Prhartcom (talk) 05:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
          • But we don't need a non-free image in order to show what a previous name was. As you say, the article already says this. J Milburn (talk) 10:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
            • You may be right that this could be challenged for FA. This is GA. For that, it meets requirements. Prhartcom (talk) 12:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
              • I have not argued that this would be challenged at FAC. I have argued that it does not meet the NFCC, which is definitely a part of the criteria. J Milburn (talk) 19:24, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
        • If you definitely think that it needs to go, then it needs to go. Just say the word. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
          • Unless there's a further justification than those offered in this discussion, I feel it has to go. Sorry. J Milburn (talk) 16:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
            • I'm sorry too. I wish to remain respectful, and I will step aside if I am asked to by Midnightblueowl, but I am pushing back on this. The image shows the original name of the adventure, before it was renamed, which supports what is asserted in the article text. Remember, many experts looked at the Soviets article during its FA review and never mentioned the Le Petit Vingtième cover. I would like to canvas a few others and get their opinion; do you have any objection? Or would you please relent? Prhartcom (talk) 19:14, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
              • Look, I'm sorry, but that just isn't an argument that holds any water, and I've already explained why. I don't mean to be patronising, but I'll go over it again. "The image shows the original name of the adventure, before it was renamed, which supports what is asserted in the article text." It does. So what? Are you honestly suggesting that readers couldn't comprehend that the name was different in old versions? Per the non-free content criteria, "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." If the understanding being added here relates primarily to the name, then the addition is minimal, as the name can perfectly easily be expressed in the writing. This also means that the image fails NFCC#1, as the non-free image is replaceable with free text. You're welcome to ask for a third opinion - WP:NFCR or WT:NFCC would be the place to do it - but I can assure you that you're wasting your time unless there is some deeper reason for the inclusion of this image which has been expressed neither here nor in the rationale. J Milburn (talk) 09:27, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
                • All right, thank-you for the explanation, you're not being patronising and I hope you know I'm being respectful. I suspect Midnightblueowl will go ahead and remove the image. In the meantime while the image is unused before it is deleted I will go ahead and learn more about it by asking a few others. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 11:19, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
            • Well that leaves me in a bit of a quandary. I won't have access to internet for a week or so, so I'll leave it up to you two to decide this between yourselves and act accordingly. Maybe other editors should be consulted ? Midnightblueowl (talk)
              • Ok- as you've both mentioned it, I have requested some more voices. J Milburn (talk) 21:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Came to throw my 2 cents in. For background, I'm mildly experienced with GA review and highly experienced with non-free content. In this case, I agree with User:J Milburn, the image fails WP:NFCC#8. The front page/cover is not the subject of sourced critical commentary. We do not need to see this image to understand this section. Although it may add to the visual quality of the article, it does not add any encyclopedic value and the article would remain a strong piece without the image. If you feel that the image is important, you can always provide an external link or use {{External media}}. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 23:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Agree with JMilburn and TLSuda above - the image fails NFCC#8, as you have text information that mentions that work's existance and original name. --MASEM (t) 00:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
User:JMilburn: Why did you say it would fail a different criteria than the one that these say? And why did you suggest I go open a topic at WT:NFCC, which I did, and then you yourself open a topic there further down, forcing an editor to delete mine? Prhartcom (talk) 03:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
First question: I mentioned NFCC#1 and NFCC#8, while Masem and TLSuda focussed on NFCC#8, without explicitly mentioning NFCC#1, but we're all basically saying the same thing. Second question: I opened a thread on WP:NFCR, not WT:NFCC- I was not aware that you had opened a thread anywhere- my apologies if you feel I have dismissed your request, as that certainly was not my intention. (I am not responsible for other editors' actions. You will have to ask the editor who deleted your message about their intentions, if you feel that the edit was problematic.) J Milburn (talk) 16:51, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I have removed both this image and the image in the Critical analysis section (as it was also under attack) from the article. Perhaps Brigade Piron can help us find a few suitable free images. Let's put this behind us. I am willing to complete the GA review while Midnightblueowl is away. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
File:Benoit Peeters 20100329 Salon du livre de Paris 3.jpg is a great picture, if you're looking for some visual interest. File:Pierre Assouline-2009.jpg is another possibility. J Milburn (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
It's just that, if you didn't know, this image is already being used in almost every single FA or GA Tintin article. Prhartcom (talk) 21:55, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

More comments[edit]

  • I appreciate the further information on the British Journal of Psychology paper, but the paper doesn't seem to exist. I can't find any reference to "Syldavia" or "General foreign policy" in the BJP, and the only article by Richardson in 1937 is Richardson, L. F. (1937). "Hints from Physics and Meteorology As to Mental Periodicities". British Journal of Psychology. General Section. 28 (2): 212. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1937.tb00870.x.
    • I see what you mean. I have been at that search engine for the last hour trying everything I could to make the article referenced by the sources come up, but had to give up. Disappointing isn't it; we could have referenced it with the doi citation. Farr's book says, "In 1937, in the British Journal of Psychology, an article written by someone called Richardson entitled 'General Foreign Policy' has an account of a hypothetical conflict between a small kingdom and an annexing power, identified as Syldavia and Borduria. Somehow, in some form, Hergé must have come across this. It is a striking example of how wide Hergé cast his net in his search for ideas." The other source mirrors these facts and gives Richardson's first name. Clearly, during Farr's research, he found the article that we could not. The only two explanations I can come up with are that the article we seek is not being included by this search engine, or the 1937 Richardson article with the different name that we did find is the one we want (we can't read the article). I suppose we'll just have to go on referencing this passage the way we currently are. Prhartcom (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Ok, seems we aren't the only people who've butted heads over this issue. Take a look at endnote 7 of chapter 12 of Hergé, Son of Tintin (p. 352). Peeters writes
        "In an article by Georges Laurenceau ("La Suldavie et la Bordurie," Les Cahiers de la bande dessinée, nos. 14-15, Hergé special, 51-2), the creation of the names of Syldavia and Borduria was attributed to a theoretical text by one Richardson, entitled Generalized Foreign Policy and published in 1937. In this essay, in which he systematically studied the problem of the arms race, Richardson created Syldavia and Borduria to make his demonstration clearer. However, no researcher has confirmed this source, which has always intrigued me. Authentication made: Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953), mathematician and designer of one of the first models of weather prediction, did indeed publish a text entitled "Generalized Foreign Politcs: A Story in Group Psychology," in The British Journal of Psychology Monograph Supplements, 1939, no. 23, Cambridge University Press. But though there was indeed a rivalry of two theoretical states, the names Syldavia and Borduria do not appear (we have seen that Hergé himself first wrote of "Sylduria"). The actual date of the first publication, 1939, moreover, makes it unlikely that it was a source of material for King Ottokar's Scepter."
      • Looks like this may be a myth. I recommend that this whole issue is hashed out in the article, as this kind of academic disagreement makes for interesting reading! J Milburn (talk) 09:45, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
        • Fascinating! Thanks to M. Peeters for his research! And to you for finding it! I located the endnote in that book also; I hadn't noticed it before. Now back to reality: I returned to the search engine, and it does not confirm the existence of the 1939 article Peeters found. I returned to the article to write of this, but it turned out not to be as interesting as it first sounded (because the essence of the tale is: Tintin scholars claimed that the country names were not Hergé's idea, but they were). I tried writing it anyway; see what you think (you may edit the passage directly if you wish). Prhartcom (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "The Scepter of Ottokar IV; Casterman changed this to King Ottokar's Sceptre" Could we have these titles in the original language, too?
    • Happy to oblige, but are we sure that is what we want? There would be four similar titles (the French title looks nearly identical to the English) one right after the other, and remember a fifth immediately follows in the start of the next sentence. A little redundant, right? Prhartcom (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Other than that, this article's looking fantastic. I have no objection to the picture of Peeter's being removed or replaced with another free image. J Milburn (talk) 16:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate this thoroughness! Prhartcom (talk) 01:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
J Milburn, is there anything else this article needs to be GA? I notice we are down to fixing rogue apostrophes! Prhartcom (talk) 11:43, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure this is there- I'll give it another quick look through and hopefully promote later this afternoon. J Milburn (talk) 13:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
OK, let me know if there is anything I can do for the article, and thanks again! Prhartcom (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I've promoted the article. Great work everyone, pleasure working with you. J Milburn (talk) 16:52, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

A few points[edit]

There are a few issues that I've noticed with this page, but since I don't have access to any of the references currently in use, I don't feel equipped to make any changes on my own. More significantly than that, I know that @Midnightblueowl: has put in a considerable amount of work on all of theTintin articles, and so I feel that it would probably be ideal for her to address these issues herself, however she sees fit.

  • First of all, the second paragraph of the "Background" section claims that this was second only to The Blue Lotus in Tintin stories that "draw specifically on contemporary events". However, as I'm sure you know, The Broken Ear preceded King Ottokar's Sceptre and was inspired by a real life war that had been waged in South America the very same year as the former comic's publication. Does Pierre Assouline not view the Chaco War as being contemporary to The Broken Ear, since it ended about six months before Herge began writing his story? That seems like a stretch to me. Obviously, we have to stick by the references, but at the same time, we don't want to report misinformation.
    • You're right here; I'm guessing that this was probably just an error on Assouline's behalf. Maybe we could alter the article prose to something like "This was not the first Tintin adventure to draw specifically on contemporary events; Hergé had for instance previously made use of the 1931 Japanese invasion of Manchuria as a political backdrop for the setting in The Blue Lotus." That way we keep the basic information, but without the inaccurate claim? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
      • I would be fine with that change. Alternatively, if many subsequent Tintin stories are inspired by specific contemporary events, and if you would like to preserve the fact that King Ottokar's Sceptre was one of the earliest to do so, then I would be fine with something along the lines of - "This was one of the earliest Tintin adventures to draw specifically on contemporary events, following such stories as The Blue Lotus, which made use of the 1931 Japanese invasion of Manchuria as a political backdrop for its setting." I'll leave the decision up to you. --Jpcase (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
        • I've made a change to the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:37, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
          • Thank you for correcting this! :) --Jpcase (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I've recently read the Little, Brown and Company edition of this comic, which carries some notes in the back. If memory serves, one of these notes suggests that Syldavian history actually parallels Romanian history. Although I don't remember anything being said about Poland, it's certainly possible that both countries served as an influence.
    • I think that likely; from what I gather, Syldavia was created as a bit of a mish-mash from what Hergé knew of various East European nations. If you could get access to that source again then we could certainly incorporate claims such as these into the article. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
      • I can now confirm that the source does indeed specify Romanian history as a supposed inspiration for Syldavia. It's a theory that has been advanced by Dodo Nita, described by the source as a "Romanian Tintin expert". I'm not sure where Nita's views can be originally found. That may be something worth looking into. The LBC edition has a fair bit on info on this, which I'll elaborate on later, once I have more time. --Jpcase (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
        • @Midnightblueowl: Actually, upon closer inspection - I was in a bit of a rush yesterday; sorry - it appears that Nita - the "t" and the "a" in his name should be accented, but I'm afraid that I don't know how create those characters on my keyboard - said nothing about Romanian history; at least, nothing that is relayed in the LB&C edition. Nita's theory is essentially based on three points: the actual name of Syldavia, he believes, is derived from a combination of Transylvania (a region of Romania) and Moldavia (my knowledge here is lacking, but as I understand it, this a historical region - not to be confused with Moldova - that has been partially absorbed by Romania. Perhaps you know more about it.); the use of a pelican as the symbol of Syldavia is seen by Nita as an indication that Romania is one of the influencing countries, as apparently Romania is the only European nation naturally inhabited by pelicans; and finally, Nita sees the mineral rich subsoil of Syldavia (which is discussed in the brochure that Tintin reads on the plane) as a reference to Romania's uranium deposits. I see that the article already contains a statement about Romanian "culture and costumes" bearing an influence on Syldavia; whether a country's name, fauna, and mineral deposits should considered cultural though, is questionable. Do you happen to still have access to the two sources (Peeters and Goddin) that are being used for the existing statement? I'm curious whether they go into any of these details. Either way, I do believe that it would be worth incorporating the above information into the article. There's also a fourth point, that may or may not have originated with Nita - the way that it's presented in LB&C leaves it unclear as to whether Nita or the publishing company itself saw this similarity, but a similarity is suggested between King Muskar XII and Prince Alexandru Ioan Cuza. The source only tells the reader to compare an attached photo of Cuza with Herge's depiction of Muskar. No further evidence of a connection between the two is offered. Still, this may be worth mentioning as well. --Jpcase (talk) 16:56, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • If you have the references to support the information then by all means incorporate it into the article. It should make for a good addition. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:37, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
  • @Midnightblueowl: If you're currently preoccupied with other articles, then I'm certainly willing to add the information myself. Although, please take the liberty of altering anything that I write, as I want you to have final say on prose and structure. Did you happen to check if you still have the Peeters and Goddin sources? Before going through with any edits, I'd like to coordinate the information from LB&C with whatever was meant by the "costumes and cultures" statement. --Jpcase (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm also fairly certain the Little, Brown and Company pointed to the Royal Palace of Brussels as the inspiration for the Syldavian royal palace. As with above, I don't recall anything being said about the Charlottenburg Palace of Berlin, but that doesn't mean both palaces couldn't have been influences.
    • Again, if you could gain access to that source again then we should definitely look into incorporating some of its claims into the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
      • This too is true. And if you ask me, the Syldavian royal palace bears a much stronger resemblance to the Royal Palace of Brussels, than it does to the Charlottenburg Palace. But again, that doesn't mean both that both palaces couldn't have served as inspiration. --Jpcase (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Since I checked the book out from the library and no longer have it, I'm not 100% positive about the two points above. I could certainly reacquire the book if need be. However, I do remember for a fact, that the book points out even more cameos in the scene at the royal court, than are written about in this article.
    • The full list of cameos mentioned by the LBC edition include those already discussed in this article (Herge, his brother Paul Remi, his then-wife Germaine Kieckens, and Edgar Pierre Jacobs), as well as Jacques Van Melkebeke, Marcel Stobbaerts and Edouard Cnaepelinckx. I'm not familiar with these latter three individuals, and unfortunately the book provides no explanation regarding how they are connected to Herge. Melkebeke has his own Wikipedia page, and so I can see how he was involved with Tintin, but no such luck for the other two. Are you familiar with Stobbaerts and Cnaepelinckx? --Jpcase (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not, although perhaps they are mentioned in some of the Hergé biographies. Given the time period in question, I suspect that they may have been staff members at Le Vingtième Siècle. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:37, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
  • @Midnightblueowl: If you still have access to any of those biographies, would you be willing to search for their names in the indexes? It would be rather confusing to mention them in this article, without providing any context for the reader. --Jpcase (talk) 15:48, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

--Jpcase (talk) 03:32, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: So sorry that I haven't returned to this matter until now. My schedule has been rather demanding lately, and I've only just now managed to reacquire the source. I've responded to all of the points above. --Jpcase (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
@Jpcase: No worries at all. I'll respond to your comments. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
@Midnightblueowl: Hey, no particular rush, but I just want to make sure that you've seen my latest messages above, in case they got lost in the shuffle. I'd like to get started on adding the LB&C information, but ideally, after knowing what Peeters and Goddin said about Romania (and whether any of the bios mention Stobbaerts and Cnaepelinckx). If you don't have the sources on hand, then that's fine. I'd just like to know what we're working with. --Jpcase (talk) 15:48, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
@Jpcase: Thanks for your message. The duo are mentioned on page 153 of Peeters' biography, which is discussing King Ottokar's Sceptre: "He was even so happy with the completed work that he inserted Jacobs into the book's final scene, next to Germaine, himself, and their closest friends, Ginette and Jacques Van Melkebeke, the painter Marcel Stobbaerts, and Édouard Cnaepelinckx." Consulting the index, this appears to be the only page containing mention of Stobbaerts within the book, however the index doesn't mention Cnaepelinckx at all. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
With regards to Romania, Peeters says that "Taking his inspiration particularly from Romania and Albania, he depicted a small operetta-type country that has preserved its age-old traditions" (p. 100). Goddin doesn't actually mention Romania, instead referring to "Albania, one of Hergé's models for Syldavia..." (p. 50). Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: Sorry for letting this get away from me yet again. I've had barely any time for Wikipedia these days, but making these additions never fell from my to-do list. I've finished incorporating all of the discussed information. Again, please feel free to make any changes, if you feel that the phrasing, structure, or flow of the writing could be improved. I only possess minimal familiarity with footnotes, bibliographies, and the Cite Book template, so it's possible that I've made a mistake or two in my referencing, although I feel fairly confident that I figured out how to go about it. I do feel that it's worth pointing out that there's no book officially titled King Ottokar's Sceptre - The Real Life Inspiration Behind Tintin's Adventures. As one can see if they click on the Google Books url link provided in the reference, this is simply a 2011 reprinting of the actual comic. In the back of the publication, there is a 23 pg. section titled The Real-Life Inspiration Behind Tintin's Adventures. For the sake of titling the reference, I've decided to combine the name of the comic with the name of the section, linking them with a hyphen. The pg. numbers actually start over at the beginning of this section, so for example, pg. 9 of The Real-Life Inspiration Behind Tintin's Adventures is actually the 71st page of the publication as a whole (not counting the unnumbered pages that precede pg. 1 of the actual comic). The copyright and publication dates are not the same. I'm looking at the book right now, and it lists the copyright date as December 2011. Google Books lists the publication date as January 10, 2012. The ISBN numbers are an exact match, so I don't think that these are two separate editions from the same publisher. I don't know much about book publishing, but it seems reasonable that there would be a month long period in between copyright registration and the date on which the book actually hit the market. As I understand it, the date / year field is meant to be for the publication date, so I've decided to use January 12, 2012 here. If anyone is more knowledgeable in this area and wants to change the dating, then feel free to do so, although I'd request that you drop a note here explaining why. --Jpcase (talk) 17:02, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: It turns out that the L, B and C source actually has even more interesting info than I had initially remembered. I've taken the liberty of adding statements about the Bosnian town of Mostar being a potential influence on the Syldavian village, the Krowpow Castle being based on both Olavinlinna Castle and Vyborg Castle, and King Muskar's carriage being based on the Gold State Coach. I've also come across a great public domain image of the town of Mostar, which I've decided to incorporate into the article, as I feel that it's worth illustrating at least one of the geographic or cultural influences on Syldavia. If anyone wants to swap this image out for something else, then I'd be open to that, so long as we discuss the matter first. There are a few more details in this source that may be worth mentioning as well.
  • Pg. 2 shares an amusing anecdote about a three year old Hergé, throwing a fit over loud "oompah" music at the German section of that year's World's Fair in Brussels. Tett (the author of The Real Life Inspiration Behind Tintin's Adventures) suggests that this experience may have led to Hergé's distaste for "pompous music", such as the opera singing of Bianca Castafiore. While this particular bit of trivia would probably be more at home in Castafiore's own article, I do feel that it would be worth fleshing out the one sentence we have here about Castafiore's introduction to the series, so as to mention Hergé's negative feelings towards opera, as well as the influence of Aino Ackté on the character (mentioned on pg. 15 of the L, B and C source, although I assume that other sources have also detailed this). The connection to Ackté is particularly relevant to King Ottokar's Sceptre, because in 1912, Ackté initiated the Savonlinna Opera Festival, which is held annually at Olavinlinna Castle. Only a single non-Finnish opera was ever performed during the first four years of this festival, and it was Charles Gounod's Faust, which contains the "Jewel Song" sung by Castafiore (this info is on pg. 11).
  • Prof. Alembick has a seal of Edward the Confessor in his collection, believed to be the earliest example of a seal used by an English monarch. Only one complete example of this seal is known of, although it's now seen as a likely forgery. (pg. 23)
  • The translation of King Ottokar IV's famous phrase (as "quoted" in the brochure) was changed for the English language edition from "Here I am, here I stay", to "If you gather thistles, expect prickles" (pg. 7).
I'm not going to add any of this information myself, as I simply don't have the time, but I'd recommend that someone look into doing so, if FA prep ever begins. One last question for you Midnight - are you quite certain that King Ottokar's Sceptre is the particular comic being discussed on pg. 153 of Peeters' biography? I don't doubt you, but it's worth noting that the cameos don't actually occur in the "final scene" of the comic, as Peeters has apparently suggested, but rather, they appear on the fourth-to-last page. It would be an understandable enough mistake on Peeters' part, but I just want to make sure. Also, while L, B, and C identifies Jacques Van Melkebeke, it says nothing of Ginnete. Are both definitely mentioned by Peeters? --Jpcase (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your research and additions, User:Jpcase. I'll get around to checking your queries soon, I hope. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:20, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Romania has a particularly large pelican population, but it is not the only country with pelicans in Europe. There are two species of pelican in eastern Mediterranean region as well. It's pretty clear from the Wikipedia articles about the two pelican species, the great white pelican and the Dalmatian pelican. 2.104.41.248 (talk) 07:09, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Balkan or Balkans[edit]

I just noticed that the first sentence of the Background section's fifth paragraph includes the term "Balkans region", whereas the following sentence uses "Balkan region". The no "s" variant is used a couple other times in this article. Google searching each term yields many results from what appear to be quality sources. Does anyone know whether one of these is more accurate or common than the other? Even if both are acceptable, I would recommend that we only use one of them for the purposes of this article. --Jpcase (talk) 23:20, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jpcase; my Google Maps says it's "The Balkan Peninsula", or "the Balkans". Feel free to change it. Best, —Prhartcom 23:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
If we're using the term "region" though? What then? I'm still not sure. But "Balkan" would make more sense as an adjective and is already used more frequently in this article, so I'll treat that as the standard and make the appropriate change. Thanks for your input! --Jpcase (talk) 23:44, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Syldavian "language"[edit]

"Tintin fans adopted the Syldavian language that appears in the story and used it to construct grammars and dictionaries, akin to the fan following of Star Trek's Klingon and J.R.R. Tolkien's Elvish." No! It's not remotely akin. Klingon and Tolkien's Elvish languages are real languages, that is, languages designed complete with grammar, phonology, and vocabulary, by professional linguists incidentally. Syldavian is not a real language. Hergé never bothered to create a Syldavian grammar or compile a Syldavian vocabulary. Everything presented as 'Syldavian' is in fact Brussels dialect in weird outlandish spelling. So you can't speak or learn Syldavian like you can speak Klingon or Quenya. This comparison is very misleading and should either be removed or strongly adapted. Steinbach (talk) 22:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)