51
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 15:
Line 15: +
Talk:Immanuel Velikovsky (view source)
Revision as of 16:38, February 15, 2009
, 16:38, February 15, 2009→Category:Authors
::::I'd say that "Authors" is a good top-level category for all authors regardless of level of success. Included amongst its subcategory could be "Great Writers of World Literature". A problem I see, however, is edit or talk page warring about who fits in said subcategory. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 10:57, 15 February 2009 (EST)
::::I'd say that "Authors" is a good top-level category for all authors regardless of level of success. Included amongst its subcategory could be "Great Writers of World Literature". A problem I see, however, is edit or talk page warring about who fits in said subcategory. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 10:57, 15 February 2009 (EST)
My suggestion would be to subdivide the "Authors" category into either genres or eras, because as it stands, that category has 3 subcategories and 362 articles. I personally agree that V merits being listed amongst the authors, but we're going to have to do some work in subcategorizing the authors category. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 10:53, 15 February 2009 (EST)
My suggestion would be to subdivide the "Authors" category into either genres or eras, because as it stands, that category has 3 subcategories and 362 articles. I personally agree that V merits being listed amongst the authors, but we're going to have to do some work in subcategorizing the authors category. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 10:53, 15 February 2009 (EST)
:::::Yes, a category "Author of great literature" (or similar), would make sense, but decided by some third-party source so there is no subjectivity. eg. books mentioned in Encylcopedia Britannica, or in Who's Who? Is there another way to assess "great literature"? Perhaps a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_literary_awards literature award]? --[[User:Eric2009|Eric2009]] 11:38, 15 February 2009 (EST)
:Currently there are seven subcats, three on the first 200, and four on the second 200. I agree with the need for more subcats. --[[User:DeanS|DeanS<sup>talk</sup>]] 10:59, 15 February 2009 (EST)
:Currently there are seven subcats, three on the first 200, and four on the second 200. I agree with the need for more subcats. --[[User:DeanS|DeanS<sup>talk</sup>]] 10:59, 15 February 2009 (EST)
::Oops, you are correct. Currently we are looking at Essayists, Historians, Journalists, Playwrights, Poets, Slavic Authors, and Women Authors. We could break what is left in the Authors category down by, say, Science Authors, Science-Fiction Authors, Religious Authors, Novelists, etc. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 11:13, 15 February 2009 (EST)
::Oops, you are correct. Currently we are looking at Essayists, Historians, Journalists, Playwrights, Poets, Slavic Authors, and Women Authors. We could break what is left in the Authors category down by, say, Science Authors, Science-Fiction Authors, Religious Authors, Novelists, etc. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 11:13, 15 February 2009 (EST)