Talk:Language Evolution (book synopsis): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Anthony.Sebastian (→Move: response to JohnS and DavidF) |
imported>David Finn (→Move: a third option to consider would be as a subpage of the author) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
::May we discuss this further. We can at anytime turf the broader issue to the EC. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 23:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC) | ::May we discuss this further. We can at anytime turf the broader issue to the EC. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 23:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC) | ||
:::I take your point about the many science fiction sysnopsii (probably it isn't synopsii but it sounds good and I have a lot to learn about spelling) - although in that case they could be grouped by author. Grouping by author might work in this case, rather than grouping by subject (i.e. making the synopsis a subpage of the author rather than evolutionary linguistics) but if you think it would be more useful as a standalone article I won't argue. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 00:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:29, 19 November 2011
Start Talk page
Start Talk page. Anthony.Sebastian 02:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Move
This is not an article, but a book synopsis, and thus arguably belongs as a subpage of the evolutionary linguistics article. It doesn't quite fit the existing subpage types, though, so I suggest creating a specific one, perhaps /Synopses. Also, with this article moved, we no longer need to have language evolution (disambiguation). John Stephenson 12:23, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- I think you are correct on both counts. The subpages are great for grouping content like that, and since the only other article in the disambiguation list is redlinked that page would certainly be superfluous. David Finn 12:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- I have written other standalone book synopses and plan many more as time permits. So have other CZ authors. I myself prefer to leave them as standalone articles, Title (book). I suspect those other authors who have written articles summarizing a book will feel the same way.
- If someone wrote ten articles, each a synopsis of a science fiction book, each by a different author, they'd get lost in a "Book Synopsis" subpage of Science fiction. I should think they each need a Main Article page.
- The article in question here was written as a book synopsis for a PLoS journal, and modified by me to make it suitable for CZ. I myself own numerous books on the evolution of language, many of which I hope to write a Title (book) Main article. I'd hate to see them buried in subpages under the Main article Language evolution.
- May we discuss this further. We can at anytime turf the broader issue to the EC. Anthony.Sebastian 23:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- I take your point about the many science fiction sysnopsii (probably it isn't synopsii but it sounds good and I have a lot to learn about spelling) - although in that case they could be grouped by author. Grouping by author might work in this case, rather than grouping by subject (i.e. making the synopsis a subpage of the author rather than evolutionary linguistics) but if you think it would be more useful as a standalone article I won't argue. David Finn 00:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)