Talk:Poetry analysis: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:42, 14 June 2005

Latest revision as of 19:35, 14 October 2024

(17 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=

{{LCOTW}}

{{WikiProject Poetry}}

Is it valid as an article ?

{{WikiProject Anthropology|oral-tradition=yes

}}

}}

==[Untitled]==

:I think [[Poetry appreciation]] would be a better title. --[[User:Deb|Deb]]

Line 14 ⟶ 18:

::::Well, as I just tried to point out, there could be / may be / will be more content in the future. I consider it rather hostile towards newcomers to start picking on them the moment they have started to edit something. [[User:KF|KF]] 21:54 Jan 17, 2003 (UTC)

:::At the very least, there needs to be a link from [[Poetry]] - otherwise potential readers will never find the article. [[User:Deb|Deb]]

Line 31 ⟶ 34:

It's already a top three hit in the search engine. :-)

: If it said 'poetry' it might rank high there tootitts.

What a wonderful birthday present.

Line 169 ⟶ 172:

== Excellent article! ==

Someone should nominate this for featured article. [[User:Revolución|Revolución]] 02:52, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

:We are the only someones here, Revolución. There is nothing to stop you nominating the article; indeed, I encourage you to do so. I already have an [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/David Helvarg/archive1|FAC]] in train, which is why I am not [[WP:BB|being bold]] myself. --[[User:TheoClarke|Theo ]] [[User_talk:TheoClarke|(Talk)]] 11:23, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

== Enneameter & Decameter ==

Line 177 ⟶ 180:

==Schools of poetry==

[[User:Filiocht|Filiocht]] has suggested that ==[[Poetry analysis#Schools of poetry|Schools of poetry]]== and ==[[Poetry analysis#Schools of criticism|Schools of criticism]]== should be our next area of focus. The more I thought about the former, the more convinced I became that it should be a separate article linked from here and [[Poetry]], at a minimum. So I synthesised [[List of poetry groups and movements|List of schools of poetry]]. It needs expanding, tidying, and, more pertinently, a summary should be written in the section here. Precis is not my strength so would someone else like to have a crack at that? --[[User:TheoClarke|Theo ]] [[User_talk:TheoClarke|(Talk)]] 23:31, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

==Sounds more like a textbook than an encyclopedia==

This article has a lot of great content, but the form and tone are of a textbook. The reader is carefully led through many examples. I would suggest lots of work to tighten up the article and remove the "teacher's voice", as outlined by the item "Page organization" above. [[User:NuclearWinner|NuclearWinner]] 21:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:In addition, there are way too many dashes in the article. [[User:Wikipediarules2221|Wikipediarul]][[WP:ESP|<span style="color:green;">e</span>]][[User:Wikipediarules2221|s]][[User talk:Wikipediarules2221|<span style="color:orange;">2221</span>]] 07:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

== Criticism section needed ==

(No comment required) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/96.241.232.122|96.241.232.122]] ([[User talk:96.241.232.122|talk]]) 06:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Plagiarism? ==

The introduction to this article is eerily similar to this site http://languageisavirus.com/poetry-guide/poetry_analysis.html

[[Special:Contributions/58.174.96.47|58.174.96.47]] ([[User talk:58.174.96.47|talk]]) 11:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:That site uses material from WP ... if you scroll down to the bottom you'll see the disclaimer. [[User:Eniagrom|Eniagrom]] ([[User talk:Eniagrom|talk]]) 22:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)