Talk:Paulo Coelho

Plagiarism and reads like an ad

The biography was plagiarised from Coelho's official biography, which can be found in various sites including [1]. The article might need more criticism, but it definitely MUST be more neutral. It reads like a press release, and would actually not be surprised if it did come from PR releases. Much of this article needs to be rehauled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.158.18 (talk) 23:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Biography

Edit needed: The second to last paragraph in the biography section seems to refer to The Alchemist, yet the book is not mentioned specifically.

amazon affiliate links

a link to a website with only amazon affiliate links was added by greedy 200.163.81.26 in 6 Apr 2003 and left untouched for over one year!! Vbs 15:10, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Statistics

In Portuguese article it seems that Coelho has sold 65 million copies in 150 countries and his books have been translated into 56 languages. But I don't know Portuguese, so I cannot make sure!! Avia 02:59, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

• That's correct, I have incorporated that information to the english article. Fbergo 04:24, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

isn't he a jew-born? in the portuguese articles there is never this information but i think he is.

IPA

How to pronounce "Coelho"? Can someone add Template:IPA2 with the correct pronounciation to the intro? Thanks. --Zoz (t) 17:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Done! Seann 08:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

How am I supposed to read that!? Aaрон Кинни (t) 05:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

To Be Like A River Flowing - A Novel?

I downloaded the work To Be Like A River Flowing from Paulo Coelho's Website, and I am of the opinion that it does not fulfil the criteria to be classified as a novel. The file I got on downloading was a *.pps presentation containing fifteen (15) slides only. Is it proper for this to be included in the list of his novels? Also, I request someone who knows to enlighten me as to where the right place is to ask such doubts. Is it the Community Portal?

Yours, Savio mit electronics 12:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Way too much POV

The current version of the article fails to stress that, for all his sales, Paulo Coelho fails to earn a lot of respect in his own country as a writer. His work is suspect, partial and of little worth by any reasonable measure. The current text also claims an eccletic quality to his work, which I find strange, seeing how casually he uses very specific occultist concepts that many religions reject. Luis Dantas 18:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the second part of your post. Can you rephrase it? Pictureuploader 20:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Gosh, I would better; Paulo Coelho has a very specific doctrine which is not really very related to Catholicism; neither is he very respectful (and apparently not even informed) about other religions either. Truth be told, I don't think he has managed to overcome his (allegedly past) background in Alesteir Crowley's Thelema very well at all, assuming that he even tried to; if nothing else, he is still too much of a attention grabber. Luis Dantas 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I see as completely out of purpose and mere POV the whole Catholicism thing in the second paragraph of the "Criticism" section. I mean, why does the article even mention Catholicism when Paulo Coelho doesn't follow a formal religion and his set of particular beliefs are actually diverse from most religions, and not Catholicism alone? The way it's phrased now, it seems like someone included this part while assuming that Catholicism would be the center of the world and should be referenced for some reason.

As for the first comment, I think what user Luis Dantas is referring to is that the word eccletic implies that the author covers a lot of different grounds, and that this isn't necessarily true. From what was given, though, I can't pick the exact thoughts from the comment on what would be the "constant background" that the author allegedly uses (not to be considered eccletic, that is), over which he would scatter the occasional occultist concepts.

He is an occultist alright, just not a very honest - or bright - one. Luis Dantas 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Also regarding the first comment, it's important to stress that the initial part is very true. Even if Coelho is the most translated Brazilian author of all time, this only stands for popularity. His works are consistently frowned upon in literary circles. Of course, opinions on his qualities as an author can sometimes be very subjective, but it's a fact that he is far from being considered of good literary value among the critics as a whole or under "any reasonable measure", as Dantas states, based only on his sales. Not that the article contradicts that, but, under "Criticism", that is not stressed enough. (Anonymous user here)

Coelho himself states that he chose Catholicism as his own way to God (no matter how diverse his teachings or spirituality are), so hence the comparison. Pictureuploader 20:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

That is a more recent stance from him, and a very questionable one. Luis Dantas 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I am brazilian. Paulo Coelho is a marketing product, a fake writer!--HistoriaReal 16:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

As a brazilian who lives in Rio de Janeiro I know a lot about this "fake writer". He was an user of drugs, had homosexual relationships and participated of a sect that adored the devil.

Are you claiming that his beliefs actually work and he quit drugs and devil-worship? I am not so sure myself... :) Luis Dantas 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I am claiming nothing. This information can not be hidden from the public and belongs to his biography —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.149.73.231 (talk) 23:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Everybody knows his past. Can not be changed. He was in a psychiatric hospital 2 times

Personally I do not mind whether he is hetero, homo or bissexual and I do not think that is even relevant for an encyclopedia article; if he "was" a drug user that must mean he quit (which I doubt, but don't quote me); and Thelema (and Coelho) are much less about devil-worshiping than about being professional assholes, social parasytes and emotional predators. His psychiatric internments are the lesser of his flaws, although they _do_ hint at how unreliable he is. Luis Dantas 09:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This article fails because do not show all about his past.

This article certainly needs more about his past. However, I have a harsh opinion about some of the above comments. A writer of several books is not a "fake writer". The fact that he used drugs, is/was homosexual, or once joined a cult, should not be held against him. None of these facts make him dishonest, nor do they take away from the fact that he is immensely popular, both in Brazil and abroad. And, if you read any of his words, you would know that he freely admits his past. Also, being committed to a mental institution is not something that he, or anybody else, should ever be ashamed of. It does not hint at unreliability in any way whatsoever! (Many famous authors have been imprisoned for crimes or mental illness!) I also need to note that being "frowned upon" in literary circles has very little to do with the quality of his writing. Virtually all popular writers are "frowned upon" in literary circles. It's usually a sign of jealousy. He has this in common with most of the so-called literary writers of the past, and once he's been dead 20 years, the literary set will claim him as their own as if he were too revolutionary in those "conservative" times of yesterday to be fully appreciated. KneesThem 05:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In response to above and to add some comment. The biography on Wikipedia seems to have Coehlo's books as a major source of information. How can Wikipedia actually have things like "supernatural" experiences mentioned as facts? Coehlo seems like a major fraud and his biography seems questionable at best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.9.249.205 (talk) 18:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

the information here about our beloved author here is not enough. I want to know more about where Paulo gets his inspiration. why was he able to write out things that everyone should have knew it but forget about them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zack2123 (talk • contribs) 08:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Paulo Coelho's Photo

I added Paulo Coelho's photo on his page. It's a picture that taken for him that he send me when I asked him for his picture. I don't understand why it's removed. It's not outsourced. What should I do to make it sourced more that this? Here is the link to the photo -> http://www.paulocoelho.com/engl/20032004_20.shtml As you can see, i uploaded the hi-res version to the wikipedia. Without his help, where can I receive the hi-res version? I hope someone can help me on this subject. Thanks! Arrariv 22:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

That picture is signed by Frederic Charmeux (as of now; maybe it changed at some point). So it would be up to Charmeux to release it into some kind of open license so that it may be used in Wikipedia. Luis Dantas (talk) 00:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Career?

From the Career section, which itself is oddly named:

As Seixas sings: "Two hands together at the same prayer" (Coisas do coração) or "The beauty of simplicity" (Eu quero mesmo).

This needs more context or explanation.

"Coisas do coração" means "things/matters of the heart."

"Eu quero mesmo" means "I want the same/the same thing."

The author's point is lost on me.

Cellmaker (talk) 01:57, 20 October 2008 (UTC)