Talk:The Saint (Simon Templar)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Templar name[edit]

What connection does Simon Templar have with the Knights Templar? Any? I remember an allusion to a connection in the very begining of the Kilmer film.

None at all, except for the name. Hayford Peirce 19:05, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is there a reason for Leslie to use the name Templar ?

I've never heard anything about the origin of the name, however the fact one of the Saint books was named Knight Templar indicates he was well aware of the original meaning of the name. 23skidoo 13:06, 6 May 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The article currently states "His true name is unknown, and the name 'Templar' was adopted at an early age from reading about the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon, the Knights Templar"; but if this is about the name of Leslie Charteris's literary character (rather than the modern-day hero of the Val Kilmer film) then it is unsupported - in the 1928-83 series of books written or edited by Charteris, the character name has no such backstory and there is no reason to believe Simon Templar is an assumed name; plus the Charteris-edited "The Saint and the Hapsburg Nacklace" reveals that Simon himself was relatively unaware of the history or deeds of the Knights Templar but upon learning of them, Simon imagines that an ancestor of his must've been a Knight Templar who survived the purges, adopting the Templar surname (which indicates Templar is indeed his genuine family surname). Certainly, Charteris was well aware of the Kinghts Templar but the character of Simon Templar himself was not until that story (published in 1975). Frankymole 20:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hapsburg vs. Habsburg[edit]

I reverted a spelling change regarding the title "Hapsburg Necklace". An editor believes it should be Habsburg, but according to this site and many others, which have illustrations of the original book covers, it's Hapsburg. 23skidoo 04:57, 10 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to be clear, since I've had to revert the edit again, this is referring to the book title itself. It may be Habsburg in real life, but in the Saint universe, it's Hapsburg. (Blame Charteris' ghost writer). 23skidoo 12:55, 10 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The website showing the correct title has now moved (the above link is dead) to here Frankymole 20:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comic books[edit]

Glad to see info added about the comic strip. What about the comic books featuring Templar that were published in the late 1940s? 23skidoo 14:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Criticism of Saint novels[edit]

I reverted the deletions but changed the sentence about the Saint novels so that it would not be objectionable to the irate fan. I don't think there can be any doubt that the plots of most thriller writers of the 1920s-1940s were less sophisticated than those of today, and take some getting used to (see for instance, Burrough's John Carter of Mars series). If this wasn't the case then the Saint would still be as popular as ever. As to the deletions on POV grounds, I don't think the people who made them understand what POV is. And do they seriously want to dispute the accuracy of my statements that the Saint came out of brawls with his hair still neatly combed and had a habit of mocking criminals and Inspector Teal with actress-to-bishop jokes? These--and lots and lots of environmentally incorrect cigarette smoke--were the hallmarks of the Saint.--19 March 2006

Please, read WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. That's all you need. Wikipedia is not a review site, and to just come out and say "so and so didn't know how to do this" without citing a source is an unverified statement and subject to deletion. The revised version, however, is much better though still a little too POV for my taste. But it's 10 times better than what was there before. Also, please review Wikipedia etiquette: it is very bad form to assume that an editor has no knowledge of Wikipedia rules, especially when that editor is an administrator. 23skidoo 20:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed the phrase about Charteris "not being able to figure out..." to simply say that the plots of his novels are more conventional than those of his short stories. Given how edgy and original some of the short stories are, I think this is a fair comment. I changed "wide" readership to "significant" readership because I note that there are not many Saint stories in Barnes & Noble or Borders. I personally would like to see a wider readership for them, which would probably happen if BBC/Mystery Theater would do Simon and Patricia in a 1930s setting (like Poirot). But wishes ain't horses.--19 March 2006

Simon lived in radio too! Maybe earlier than the years mentioned.[edit]

Simon lived in radio too! Maybe earlier than the years mentioned in the formal text. The character of the Saint / Simon Templar may predate the books and the movies listed herein. My late mother used to tell me stories of her and her father sitting by the radio and listening to installments of the Saint's adventure stories. The name and the style of the character was the same. I never knew about the TV or movies, and recognized Simon in the 1997 Saint movie the from her radio stories. Mother was born in Dec. 4, 1917 and raised in Lorain, Ohio (25 miles west of Cleveland.) She served in the US Army during WWII, so this had to be between 1918 and 1945 (she lived at home until the service - Mother's actual military service dates: 21 Nov 1944 to 21 June 1947.) The Rock in Rock Hall of Fame in Cleveland has a detailed record of broadcasts made in US radio; my mother and I visited this exhibit together and spent hours. I am sure that someone who knows this topic better than I can check this out.

I can assure you that The Saint was not a radio character prior to 1928 when Meet the Tiger was first published, but it is possible there may have been earlier radio adaptations than those featuring Vincent Price in the 1930s, although all the official sources on The Saint do not mention this. There is a book by Burl Barer that lists every single Saint production ever made that I hope to purchase from Amazon shortly, which might clear some of this up. 23skidoo 02:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just did a little more research and found a webpage [1] that lists radio broadcasts featuring the Saint going back to 1940 in Britain and 1945 in the US, several years before the Vincent Price version, so you are correct that Templar was on radio before Price. 23skidoo 02:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just as an aside, why would the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame have a list of every (and I doubt it would be every in any case) radio broadcast? That sounds like something more appropriate for the Museum of Television and Radio. 23skidoo 14:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the early years of the museum, Rock and Rock Hall of Fame viewed Gospel (from the slavery days) and early radio as the roots of rock and roll. Many late 1990's exhibits featured radio and music history from the US heartland, prior to the 1950's. The radio database enabled listener to choose a city and a decade to hear specific radio broadcasts, say Joe Blow announcer in St. Louis in the 1940's. This was separate from the rock music databases.
Neat. Thanks for the information. 23skidoo 01:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Templar's nationality[edit]

Perhaps someone better read than I can answer this one. Do we know the Saint's nationality? I am reading Enter the Saint and at one point he is identified as being South African but it's hard to tell if this is actually the case or if it's just part of an alias. Thoughts? 23skidoo 17:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isn't it just an it-goes-without-saying assumption that he's a fairly upper-class Brit? And that any other nationality mentioned is a part of a disguise that he's assumed. I don't think I've ever seen his nationality questioned before. Although, of course, there's absolutely no reason not to question it.... Hayford Peirce 18:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was just something that caught me as odd. I thought I'd read somewhere that Templar's nationality was never really established which is why it was possible for the character to be played by South African, British, Australian, American and even French actors. The South Africa reference (the story I'm referring to is "The Man Who Was Clever") just came out of the blue and was never really followed up, and it was a third party character who described Templar as South African. It's possible this was a detail that Charteris Chuck Cunningham'ed as he developed the character. 23skidoo 19:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmmm, innarestin'. I wonder if this is worth a sentence or so in the Simon Templar article? That most people assume he's a Brit but that it's never explicitly stated. On the other hand, there are gotta be a ton of, say American characters, where it's never explicitly stated either. Archie Goodwin, we're told, was born in Ohio. But Ellery Queen didn't have a birthplace, I think. Marlowe was born in Oregon, but did Chandler say so in a letter or in a story. There must be lotsa other examples. Hayford Peirce 20:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm hesitant to add this myself because as I indicated in my PMs I haven't read a lot of Saint. It's my understanding that Charteris never explicitly defined Templar as British, but someone with a more in-depth knowledge of the subject may know otherwise. Is Burl Barer in the house? ;-) 23skidoo 21:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The 20th Century Crime and Mystery Writers book I cited says about the Saint's first appearances: "The Saint has no war record, a classless, romantic past only hinted at, and nothing but caustic contempt for chauvinism, pride of birth, public schools, and the ruling classes." So there's nothing there to say that he couldn't have been a polished South African, say, or even a 'Stryne, hehe.... Hayford Peirce 22:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Charteris' reference to a South African past for his hero may have been a wry reference to John Buchan's Richard Hannay (who, in his conventionality, snobbishness, and obtuseness, was the opposite of Templar).--31 May 2006
It's been decades since I read the Hannay stories -- was he South African? Hayford Peirce 18:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We know that the Saint is British in the early novels because Claud Eustace Teal mentions his propensity for committing crimes in foreign countries, returning to England and then daring the government concerned to try and extradite him from his own country. I could probably find the exact reference without too much trouble.
And re-reading Knight Templar, I notice that the egregious Hermann addresses him twice as "English swine!" Paul Magnussen (talk) 23:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
However, in one of the wartime stories he seems to have American identity papers, and in still another, a French waiter who doesn't like him says "sales Américains!". So he seems to have become a naturalised American about the same time as Charteris. Paul Magnussen (talk) 22:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a mention in one of the earlier novels IIRC (not Meet the Tiger, maybe The Last Hero?) about ST's early career in SE Asia/Australia. I'm sorry I cannot now recall accurately, it's been too many decades. I do remember the mention−and that's all it is−was never treated in depth. (talk) 04:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles on the books[edit]

I'm in the process of starting articles on the Saint books. So far I've mainly focused on the early books as they're the ones I'm reading now. I also converted a couple of articles on the films to articles on the books that inspired the films. As a rule, I am using the title under which the collection/novel was first published as a book, rather than the serialized magazine title or later reissue title. For example, The Avenging Saint will be listed under Knight Templar and so on. If anyone wants to jump ahead and create articles based on later books, please feel free to use any of the articles I started as a template. Note that I have set up a "series succession" box that should go on each article. Ideally I'd like to eventually see the Templar book articles to end up along the same lines as the many articles based on the individual James Bond novels which I was involved in creating as well. 23skidoo 20:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hiya, thanks for the work on the books.  :) Unfortunately though, the term "Knight Templar" was already taken (via months of consensus-building discussions), so I've temporarily moved the book article to a more appropriate title. Will "Knight Templar (novel)" work? Or would you rather have "Knight Templar (1930 novel)" or something different? --Elonka 22:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd personally prefer a disambiguation page whenever possible. I'm considering doing that with the fantasy novel The Last Hero. If you're going to move it, I'd like to see the article title be Knight Templar (The Saint) to be consistent with what I did initially with Last Hero. I personally feel the move was unnecessary. If you check "What Links Here" you'll see that no pages link to Knight Templar anymore. 23skidoo 00:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Knight Templar (The Saint) works for me.  :) As for the "What links here" to Knight Templar, that's deliberate, and again, as the result of much much discussion. The main contention on the name had to do with Freemasons, who wanted "Knight Templar" to refer to a degree in the York Rite. It took a long time and a lot of consensus building, and creation of new categories, and extensive polls, but things are all pretty much balanced at the moment. If you'd like pointers to any of the discussions/polls/arguments/etc., let me know and I'll provide diffs. But as long as you're happy with the new name for the book page, I'm happy too. :) --Elonka 16:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do feel it's important that a dab statement remain at the top of the Knights Templar page pointing readers to the books article (someone looking for this specific Saint novel won't go to Templar necessarily), in lieu of creating a disambiguation page that would only have 2 items on it (a no-no I'm told). As long as the dab note is kept, I'm fine. BTW I do believe there may be another novel of similar name out there, so this issue may rise again if someone does an article on that book. 23skidoo 17:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Amazon has a book called The Knight Templar (Crusades Trilogy S.) (Paperback) by Jan Guillou, apparently a novel. Hayford Peirce 17:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You bring up good points, so I've gone ahead and changed Knight Templar into a disambiguation page which may address everyone's concerns, though it may also trigger another firestorm about what the term means. In terms of your particular concerns, as regards the book though, is it satisfactory? --Elonka 21:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's OK by me -- thanks for your efforts on this. 23skidoo 21:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Book articles complete[edit]

I have now started articles on all 52 Saint books, although most of these are little more than stubs. I invite anyone familiar with the books to add story summaries and other information (including corrections if I've goofed anything). We're also missing cover scans for a number of books, particularly the later ones. Any additions are welcome. 23skidoo 17:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Collaborations vs. ghost writing[edit]

Charteris himself acknowledges that the books were ghost-written in his introduction to "The Saint on TV". They were collaborations only in that Charteris chose the stories to be adapted and had editorial control over the others (except for the two that according to were more direct collaborations). Harry Harrison, on his official website, says Vendetta was all his; it's possible he is lying, but the burden of proof is to show a source that indicates he is. What does Burl Barer's book have to say on all this? 23skidoo 12:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you look at the manuscripts for the collaborations then you see that Charteris had significant input and rewrote chunks (some significant). Indeed he makes numerous references to them in correspondence and some published pieces as collaborations--ghost writing implies a writer who was paid to write something which as published with no further editing and no credit for the ghost. This was most definitely not the case as Charteris credited all collaborators who wanted to be credited. The statement re: Vendetta is based on a direct response from Charteris when questioned on this matter and is supported by manuscript samples (held privately and at Boston University).

So Harrison is lying? You might want to contact his website on this, seriously. (I don't have the link handy but there's one at the Harry Harrison article). 23skidoo 13:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quote from Barer's published history: "Charteris revised Harrison's draft, making changes both minor and major..."

Well, it ought to be easy enough to write a sentence somewhere along the lines of: "Sources are divided about whether Charteris did any actual writing on some of these later books and whether they were genuine collaborations or purely ghost-written efforts. With Vendetta, for instance, Harry Harrison himself blah blah but another source blah blah...." Hayford Peirce 15:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe we do say that Charteris served in an editorial capacity; that pretty well describes his involvement in Vendetta and the others, I think... 23skidoo 20:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Saint template[edit]

I have created a new template which lists all the Saint books, films, and TV shows in one place and have put it on all the applicable articles (whew!). Related to the above conversation I'm using the term "collaboration" to describe the post-1963 books, although I list Burl Barer's books separately as he receives sole author credit. Just for the record I won't be putting the template on this article -- and I don't suggest it be done -- as the way the book and film lists are handled here allow for a greater level of detail than is possible in a template (for example, indicating who played Templar, and listing which stories are in which book). 23skidoo 20:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some Saint answers[edit]

I have a letter from Charteris stating how fed up he was with this whole Harrison thing. From evidence at Boston, Charteris made revisions to Harrison's ms...and the story I tell about how the book came about (in my massive tome) is direct from Charteris.

As for nationality -- Charteris wanted both Brits and Americans to be able to claim him...Charteris was a UK citizen who became an American citizen. So, the same can be said of the Saint.

Burl Barer

Welcome to Wikipedia! Please feel free to make any changes and corrections to not only this but the other Saint articles as well. I'm just starting to read your book on the Saint and I'm incorporating some corrections as I go along. The only "correction" I've made to your information (and it's more from a story chronology standpoint) is I'm placing "Enter the Saint" before "Last Hero" since the stories in one clearly happen before the other. But if the books were physically released in the opposite order, let's fix it. The information I had initially came from Harrison's website so you might want to send him a correction. (I've been alterting the wording to say the 1964- books were either collaborations or books on which Charteris served as editor, which from what I've read probably applies to Vendetta. Also, please note I created an article on your Capture the Saint book; please feel free to expand on that if you haven't already. Is this book still available? Cheers! 23skidoo 13:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Christian saint aliases[edit]

The article states that Kilmer's Saint uses Christian saint's names as aliases rather than S.T. names; my recollection is that Return of the Saint did this too. jnestorius(talk) 23:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Didn't he use Joshua Pond in at least one novel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In at least two of the Roger Moore TV episodes his aliases include a middle name beginning with P: J Pierpoint Sykes (S02E16 - The Wonderful War) and Samuel P Taggart (S02E19 - Luella). Notstopping (talk) 04:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Daredevil article created[edit]

I've just created an article at Daredevil (novel). I've linked it to the Saint series as it features the first appearance of Teal. I can't seem to find any source with a plot synopsis for this obscure book, so if anyone knows what it was about, please feel free to expand the article. 23skidoo 17:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Teal article created[edit]

I have also created an article on Claud Eustace Teal. This one needs expansion, especially by anyone who can write about the character as he appeared in later Saint books. 23skidoo 18:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My only real recollection of Teal is that the Saint is always poking him in the belly, which quivers like jelly (or the Saint *says* that it does) (or am confusing this with something from P.G. Wodehouse?). What I'm really saying is that I thought the Saint made merciless fun of him most of the time. Is this the case? If so, shouldn't it be mentioned in the article as a major aspect of their relationship? Hayford Peirce 18:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Holy Terror does have Templar pulling a "Pillsbury dough boy" on Teal, but I wasn't sure if this was a recurring thing as I only recall it in that one book. I'll add it to the article anyway. 23skidoo 18:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmmm, I have memories of him saying stuff like, "You and your great belly," and "Why, it's Claud Eustace himself, and his great belly." And Claud Eustace protesting hotly about being poked in the belly. Wish I could open a couple of books and quickly find a couple of examples.... Maybe they're in a "middle-period Saint" that you haven't gotten to yet. Hayford Peirce 18:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The stuff you describe is definitely present in The Holy Terror (aka The Saint vs Scotland Yard) which I only finished a couple of weeks ago. The question is whether Templar continued "bellying" Teal into the mid-period. I have a question regarding Teal but I will put it on the talk page of the article, rather than drawing this page too off-topic. 23skidoo 18:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oops! Simon just poked Teal in the belly again in "The Simon Templar Foundation" (The Misfortunes of Mr. Teal). I guess it was a habit, after all! 23skidoo 22:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fictional orphans category[edit]

This is a question for people more well-read in The Saint than I. The article is listed under the Fictional Orphans category, but so far in my readings there's no reference to him having been an orphan. I know the 1997 movie had him as an orphan so I'm wondering if Charteris actually established this for his version of the character? 23skidoo 22:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's only really one way to say this: no. Charteris purposely avoided providing the Saint with a backstory.--Hoppy Uniatz 09:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought so. In which case, should we delete the category, or should be keep it since at least in the 1997 film Templar was an orphan. One thing to consider is this article makes very little reference to the Val Kilmer version (or for that matter Roger Moore's), referring almost exclusively to the literary version. I say the category should go, but I'd like to hear other views first. 23skidoo 13:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I'd have to concur, the orphan category should go. But then, read all the categories too carfully and perhaps more should be ditched--or at least renamed. After all, there was nothing fictional about the Saint's abilities to steal, he was indeed a thief, nothing fictional about it whatsoever...Hmmm, I need to go and lie down...--Hoppy Uniatz 12:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Heh. Yeah, I know it's possible to overread categories, but I think the thief, etc. categories are OK. I'm going to go ahead and remove the orphan category and if someone objects we can discuss it further. 23skidoo 14:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the Kilmer saint should be kept as seperate as possible from the rest of the subject. The film was really just another action film. if the Simon Templar name had not been used, there would have been no clue at all that this was the Saint. None of his characteristics were used, just the name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:33, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • It doesn't hurt to perhaps reference aspects of the film. To be honest, as Leslie Charteris himself stated once, the Roger Moore Saint was just as removed from the book character. And the article on James Bond balances both the book and film versions of that character. In the grand scheme of things the Kilmer version of the character was a only a minor piece of the puzzle, so we don't need to go overboard. A couple years ago someone tried to use a photo of Kilmer to represent the character and I got that taken down. There have been so many interpretations of the character the only things worth using in relation to this is the stick figure logo. 23skidoo (talk) 00:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reinstating deleted links[edit]

I have reverted the deletion of the two radio show-related links. I don't understand how either can be seen as spam. One is a page that lists all the radio shows and as such is a valid reference. The other is a site where you can download about 12 hours worth of Saint radio shows which, being public domain, are available for free. Neither link was posted as spam and I invited the editor who deleted them to try and explain the rationale for doing so. I've seen far more commercialized links kept on other articles. 23skidoo 06:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've not checked out these links yet but I must point out that none of the radio shows are public domain and I will bring that to the attention of the appropriate web site. All rights to the radio shows belong to the Charteris Estate.--Hoppy Uniatz 07:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Interesting. If that's the case the show list article is still valid as a reference but obviously we'd need to rethink the one for the Price radio shows. However it should be noted that to my knowledge the estate has not made these (quite good, in my opinion) radio broadcasts available anywhere else so I think the link should stay so people have a chance to hear some of these (though the wording "public domain" might need to be removed). 23skidoo 12:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They're under license to Radio Spirits, who are looking into this matter.--Hoppy Uniatz 09:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have they made the shows commercially available? If so, that would be worth noting. 23skidoo 14:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removal from Films Wikiproject[edit]

I just noticed that this article was listed under the Films Wikiproject. I have taken the "be bold" measure and removed it from that project. Although Templar was the subject of several films and TV series, this article is primarily about the literary character and the series of books. I'm leaving the preceding up as an example of how Wikipedia rots your brain as I was the one who added this article to the project! In any event, I don't think it really is applicable to the Films Wikiproject on further examination. 23skidoo 00:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Metafictionally aware characters[edit]

Surely you're not gonna add this intriguing category and then not tell us in the article How, Where, When, Why, Etc. the Saint falls into this category! (PS -- I'm gonna add Dr. Gideon Fell to this category, on the basis of his "locked room lecture" in The Three Coffins. Hayford Peirce 02:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, I thought I had, but for some reason the edit wasn't recorded (I've noticed the server has been going off and on all night. I'll try adding it again. 23skidoo 06:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Continued deletion of the non-commercial links[edit]

It is not a violation of WP:EL or any other policy to have these two links on the page. One is a data sheet listing all the radio shows with their airdates. It is a reference. The second is a page offering free downloads of shows that are claimed to be in the public domain. I am aware there was some discussion on this earlier, but seeing as no changes have been made to the second website in question it is assumed that this issue has been settled. These deletions will continue to be reverted by me and other users until the unregistered user or someone else makes a good case for why they should be removed. With Wikipedia's increased emphasis on WP:CITE and WP:V the onus is also upon them to provide replacement links providing the same information. Since the anonymous user has used personal insults in related discussion on his talk page, this discussion will be monitored for violations of Wikipedia:Etiquette. 23skidoo 12:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Other collections[edit]

Should the list of books only include the initial appearance of stories? I have a 1945 printing of a 1942 or 1943 book, The Saint At Large, an "anthology or antipasto" (as Charteris describes it in his introduction) of selected stories from The Brighter Buccaneer, The Saint Intervenes (Boodle), and The Happy Highwayman. Should this be in the list of books? ajad 03:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When I put the list together I made the decision to only include original releases and not reissues. Otherwise there would be dozens more and we'd have to make articles for each one. The only exception I made was for Wanted for Murder because it was for decades the only release of two of the UK books. So, no I don't think it's necessary to list all the reprint volumes unless there is something particularly notable such as bestseller status or something. 23skidoo 05:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sound file suggestion[edit]

A number of articles have soundfiles attached (see, for example, Return of the Saint). I think a sound file should be added to this article featuring the 8-note "Saint signature" melody that was featured in the films, radio and TV series. The tune can probably be extracted from one of the public domain radio shows, but I have no idea how to create OGG files. Does anyone know? 23skidoo 15:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lead image[edit]

I strongly disagree with using an image (and possibly an unfree image, at that) of Val Kilmer to represent a character dating back to 1928. This article is primarily about the literary character, not the film adaptation. If we must have an image of an actor, then let's use Roger Moore or George Sanders -- or better still, an image of Leslie Charteris who portrayed the character in a fumetti series in the 1940s. I'm also expanding the infobox. He actually preferred knives over pistols as indicated in the books, and we should not just list Kilmer as the actor playing the role. I have no objection to the image being used elsewhere in the article. 23skidoo 04:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do agree, but we need an Image.Obi-WanKenobi-2005 20:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, the obvious place to put it is in the section lower down in the article called The Saint on film and TV. Hayford Peirce 20:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure if Obi-Wan means we should have an image at the top of the article. Since this is a literary character we should use an image related to the books. The one I have there right now doesn't have to stay. We could replace it with a first edition image of Meet - The Tiger! or one of the early novels. The first two images used for James Bond have nothing to do with the films; the lead image is the 007 logo, followed by an illustratation of the character from the comic strip. In lieu of a book image, perhaps we could use the Saint stick-figure, either scanned from a book or if someone has a paintbrush program, it's easy enough to create. Unfortunately I have neither a paintbrush program nor a working scanner at my disposal at the present time so I can't do it myself. 23skidoo 20:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I've got a working scanner, plus lotsa Saint books, so when you agree on what you need, let me know. I can certainly find a stick figure to scan.... Hayford Peirce 21:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you can find a good vertical stick figure, just by himself, that would be good. He should be in the well-known pose, if possible -- see the Saint in New York cover that appears on this article for what I mean. You might find a good example on the spine, or alternately if you can scan one of the closing pages (with the "Watch for the sign of the Saint, he will be back" message) and edit out the wording, that might work OK as well. 23skidoo 22:23, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Might be worth noting that the stickman logo is a registered trademark and can't be used without permission.--Hoppy Uniatz 09:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That could be said of every logo, however, but Wikipedia's Fair Use rules makes allowances for this. In fact they're more lenient regarding logos than photos. Also I have yet to see a Saint stick figure with the "tm" designation - so what is your source for it being a trademark. I don't see that on Barer's book nor any of the Saint novels in my collection. Compare with, say, the Star Trek logo which is always accompanied by (tm). I just checked the US Patent and Trademark Office site here and was unable to find any listing for the Saint stick figure. If it's trademarked, it isn't trademarked in the US where Wikipedia is based. The only Saint-related trademarks I could find is one for an unrelated nightclub and an American and a British trademark for what is described as the logo for the TV series but that could be any number of things. 23skidoo 12:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmmm...check the dedication page in Burl's book. In fact check all the chapter pages as well. Note the letter r in a circle down by the Saint's feet. Read pages 138/139 in the hardback edition of Burl's book regarding various infringements. Google "Audrey Charteris" and you'll see detilas of an opposition made by Leslie#s widow in respect of a clothing trademark registration in the UK, go to the stickman gallery at and check out the info on that page, indeed go to or any of the other Saintly web sites, speak to Southampton Football Club (aka the Saints) in the UK, or St Helens Rugby Club in the UK or speak to the producers of the new series and discover just waht lengths they've gone to to protect their copyright!--Hoppy Uniatz 16:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But which version of the stick figure has been trademarked? I have 60 years' worth of Templar novels with not a single R in a circle or registered trademark among them. The magazine illustrated has no trademark indication and Charteris owned it. I could draw a 007 with the 7 looking like a gun and it wouldn't be the same as the trademark Danjaq owned. This is completely moot and irrelevant in any case as Wikipedia's fair use policy allows for the use of logos -- trademarked or not. In fact its policy is more liberal than that used for promotional images. If you're saying we can't use the stick figure then we're gonna have to remove all the book cover illustrations as well. 23skidoo 17:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The poster image for the Kilmer movie was unnecessary because we already had a shot of Kilmer in the role. We should instead try to seek out an image of Louis Heyward or George Sanders. This is not a Kilmer article. I also removed the Patricia Holm image because I feel things are getting a bit too image heavy, and this will become very noticable if I move the book series chart to its own article which I'm considering. The Kilmer film poster image could be added to the movie article, though. 23skidoo 23:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rationale for removing the new image of 9 March[edit]

Although I appreciate the effort, I have reverted the change of lead image for the following reasons: 1. it is not the complete logo and is very difficult to see properly compared to the original 2D version; 2. It is once again an image related to the 1997 movie when we should be adding images relating to the books; 3. As a screenshot from a movie, it is subject to Wikipedia's very strict fair use rules, which are getting tighter all the time. Under the current rules a screen shot can not be used for this purpose. I have no objection to the image I uploaded being replaced by a better one, but it needs to be a 2D image taken from one of the books or the Saint magazine. It should not be taken from any of the films otherwise Wikipedia's copyvio police will simply remove it. 23skidoo 22:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SaintGetaway.jpg[edit]

Image:SaintGetaway.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 22:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ogilvy.jpg[edit]

Image:Ogilvy.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 04:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New TV series needs a citation[edit]

The reference to a new TV series being produced needs a citation. Also, it needs to be confirmed whether the series production is still going ahead or if it has been affected by the WGA strike (despite it being filmed overseas). 23skidoo (talk) 18:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required[edit]

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New series cancelled[edit]

According to the Hollywood Reporter, production of the pilot for the proposed new series did not go ahead and Purefoy is now being tapped to star in a series for NBC. I have added the appropriate citation and removed the new series from the list. If and when a new production is announced, it should be treated separately. 23skidoo (talk) 12:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This, of course, pre-supposes that the Hollywood Reporter is correct in what they say. Quite how a production which had no network home can be cancelled is intriguing...--Hoppy Uniatz (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Productions are cancelled all the time before they're bought by a network or given broadcast. For a recent example, see "Rose Tyler Earth Defense", a spinoff of Doctor Who that was officially commissioned and given a budget by the BBC, but pulled before production began (by the show's producer). There have also been numerous examples of series cancelled before broadcast, even though the pilot sold. I think there was something called Manchester Prep that this happened to. The Hollywood Reporter and Variety are considered the newspapers of record for the film and television industry, so yes I would consider it an authoritative source. 23skidoo (talk) 05:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should have another actor illustrated, not Kilmer[edit]

I no longer add images to Wikipedia, so I can't do this myself, but I do not feel it's appropriate to use the image of Val Kilmer under the Actor's section, as his film was not very successful and he is one of the lesser actors to have played the Saint (not in terms of ability, but in terms of impact as the character). In fact the film is so far removed from the Simon Templar as created by Leslie Charteris it might be considered inaccurate to have himas the only actor shown. Instead, we should have an image of Roger Moore or George Sanders in the role. If someone wants to go ahead and make the change, please do. An alternative might be to create a collage of the different actors, similar to the lead image at Doctor (Doctor Who). 23skidoo (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Val Kilmer As Simon Templar In The Finale Of The Saint A 1997 Film.JPG[edit]

The image Image:Val Kilmer As Simon Templar In The Finale Of The Saint A 1997 Film.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

C-Class rated for Comics Project[edit]

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I've switched the link to public-domain radio programs to The Internet Archive at -- nothing really wrong with the previous link, but the Archive has three times as many programs available. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And changed the photo caption on the 1943 Avon paperback to reflect that publishing style; as far as I know, the Saint was not big in the pulps but was a mainstay of the early days of Avon paperbacks. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Winter for the Saint[edit]

We need a source or link of some sort to verify this recent addition to the film's list. I'm suspicious because it's listed as being a "short film" and the rights to the Saint are known to be held by a major studio owing to the fact a TV series was commissioned (albeit dropped) recently. If this is just an amateur YouTube fan production, it has no place being here. Fan films are generally not notable, with the James Cawley Star Trek Phase 2 films being an exception because of their major award-nomination status and use of notable cast members and production crew. (talk) 14:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New comic book series[edit]

There's supposed to be a new series of comics based on The Saint coming out in 2011. I haven't been able to confirm this so I can't add it to the article yet. If anyone else can confirm, please feel free. (talk) 22:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possessive of “Charteris”[edit]

I have effectively reverted the “correction” of the possessive of Charteris’s name, throughout, in conformity with Fowler’s Modern English Usage, 2nd edition (ISBN 0-19-281389-7), Possessive Puzzles, section 1. Paul Magnussen (talk) 18:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We don't use Fowler here, we use our own manual of style. That said, I will concede that the MOS does permit the ugly s's possessives and will refrain from any silly edit-warring on the matter. I will not concede that it was "incorrect" just because Fowler said so. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:SaintGoesOn.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:SaintGoesOn.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 4 June 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:SaintGoesOn.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:58, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Political Correctness[edit]

Most of the Saint novels seem to be out of print. Is this anything to do with the rather robust language used by ST when describing other races? Valetude (talk) 17:07, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On the contrary, they've all just been reissued (except for Meet the Tiger) by Holland Books. Paul Magnussen (talk) 20:30, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does Charteris hold a record?[edit]

Meet the Tiger was published in 1928, while Salvage for the Saint was published in 1983, 55 years later. Although Charteris stopped writing the novels directly after 1963, he was still involved in an editorial and rewriting capacity through to the end. Would it be correct to describe his 55-year tenure overseeing the Saint books as a record? By comparison, Doyle oversaw his Sherlock Holmes series for 40 years. ER Burroughs oversaw Tarzan for 35 years (though new books under his name continued to appear post-mortem). Charteris has to be considered one of the longest-running authors/editors of an adventure book series. (talk) 16:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Simon Dutton series[edit]

The page attributes it to the Mystery Wheel of Adventure strand in the United States, but it appears that while these screenings began in October 1989, The Brazilian Connection and The Blue Dulac went out in the UK on 2 and 9 September respectively under the series title of The Saint, produced by Saint Production for LWT. Fear in Fun Park was scheduled for 14 September, but was pulled because of poor ratings; it and the other three episodes eventually went out in July and August 1990. Nick Cooper (talk) 13:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New film[edit]

Someone added some information without source that a new film is in preproduction. We need a citation for this. (talk) 19:54, 16 May 2017 (UTC) I've deleted this due to lack of citation and the fact it's incorrect.Hoppy Uniatz (talk) 19:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Saint (Simon Templar). 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) 23:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move 27 May 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus against the proposed title. I note that there were musings of other potential titles or splits, and this closure shouldn't be seen as precluding one of those if there is consensus at any stage for it. (non-admin closure) Turnagra (talk) 19:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

– This page currently serves as the de facto WP:CONCEPTDAB for The Saint franchise. Despite not being the pageviews leader (see The Saint (1997 film) and The Saint (TV series)), this article would appear to be a better landing spot than the current dabpage, where there is nothing else of comparable notability. 162 etc. (talk) 16:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing info[edit]

Information on the French movie series seems to be missing. 2604:3D09:1F74:1C00:5038:F7DB:5AB1:A6E4 (talk) 14:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was listed in the film section, not television. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 15:47, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]