Talk:Senator: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
If there is no more to be said (as the edit summary said), then since this is merely a definition, it is not a proper subject for an article at all. Like Wikipedia, CZ is not a dictionary. But perhaps there is more to be said. It depends on whether there will be anything left to be said about senators, ''per se,'' after talking about [[Senate]], and the various senates that have existed, and the history of senates or of particular senates. Moreover, the question is whether there is anything interesting to say about senators ''in general'' as opposed, for example, to U.S. Senators. I can easily imagine an interesting article about, for example, the changing demographics of U.S. Senators. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 23:26, 1 April 2007 (CDT) | If there is no more to be said (as the edit summary said), then since this is merely a definition, it is not a proper subject for an article at all. Like Wikipedia, CZ is not a dictionary. But perhaps there is more to be said. It depends on whether there will be anything left to be said about senators, ''per se,'' after talking about [[Senate]], and the various senates that have existed, and the history of senates or of particular senates. Moreover, the question is whether there is anything interesting to say about senators ''in general'' as opposed, for example, to U.S. Senators. I can easily imagine an interesting article about, for example, the changing demographics of U.S. Senators. But I'm not sure if this information properly belongs in a generic [[senator]] article. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 23:26, 1 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 22:27, 1 April 2007
If there is no more to be said (as the edit summary said), then since this is merely a definition, it is not a proper subject for an article at all. Like Wikipedia, CZ is not a dictionary. But perhaps there is more to be said. It depends on whether there will be anything left to be said about senators, per se, after talking about Senate, and the various senates that have existed, and the history of senates or of particular senates. Moreover, the question is whether there is anything interesting to say about senators in general as opposed, for example, to U.S. Senators. I can easily imagine an interesting article about, for example, the changing demographics of U.S. Senators. But I'm not sure if this information properly belongs in a generic senator article. --Larry Sanger 23:26, 1 April 2007 (CDT)