Talk:Robur the Conqueror

Robur or Robert

Shouldn't it be "Robert the conqueror" (or "Robert, the Conqueror"). Robert is the English translation of Robur. -- Stbalbach 19:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

English translations of the book always have the name as "Robur". Is "Robert" an English translation of "Robur"? The French version of the English "Robert" is "Robert". They are pronounced differently (pardon my lack of IPA, but the English is like ROB-urt and the French is ro-BEAR) but spelled the same. 12.22.250.4 21:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Robur is the Latin word for strong. -- Brothernight (talk) 15:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Energy

Where did the Albatros got its energy from? --Error 19:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

According to the book, it used battery power, very advanced and of a secret composition. A modern editor speculated that it could be nuclear power, though I would find it doubtful given the time it was published. Afalbrig (talk) 13:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Definitely electrical energy and motors. The energy sources are called "piles and accumulators". (Batteries and capacitors?) Never explained in the first book where/how they get charged, but left to guess on Island X. In the second book, Master of the World, it seems like the charging energy is continuously drawn from the air, and this description seems applied retroactively to the first book. Not nuclear power! -74.75.208.148 (talk) 19:30, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Accumulator was the name used for capicitor or condensor during the nineteenth century. Also, Tesla was advocating that we should be drawing our electrical power from the atmosphere at this time.-- Brothernight (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Plot summary

This section was renamed to "Preview", without any explanation. The usual format for works of fiction is to use the heading "Plot summary" or simply, "Plot". (see others in category for examples) Is there any reason why the heading "Preview" is to be preferred in this case?

Also, the text has been re-written somewhat. As it is now 400b longer without saying much of substance, and contains several spelling mistakes: How is this an improvement? All changes to articles should seek to improve or otherwise add understanding to the subject, otherwise there is no point in keeping them. How does the current version "better reflect the novel"? Swanny18 (talk) 16:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect plot summary

The first part of the article states that the flag was planted atop the Eiffel Tower, but the book was published before the Eiffel Tower had begun construction. Is it possible the film adaption's story was used for this page's summary? It isn't possible for the Eiffel Tower to appear in a book that came before it was built. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.144.59 (talk) 04:03, 26 April 2017 (UTC)