Talk:Literature
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gigg (talk | contribs) at 04:25, February 22, 2008. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Content?
This page is almost absurdly devoid of content about one of the great topics of... well, life. It is simply insane that there are huge articles devoted to a thousand different iterations of homosexual topics, but that this is the page for something so vital to a full life and educated mind. Literature is a word commonly used to denote the great books, so at least some discussion of literary study or criticism would be good. Instead the page's content is essentially a copied dictionary definition, a copied encyclopedia definition, a mediocre metaphysical poem, and a terribly written quote from a free online study guide. It's a travesty.--Gigg 22:59, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- I hate to sound patronizing, but... please improve it? That's what Wikis are for, right? This is still a very young (albeit successful!) project, so your help would be appreciated.-MexMax 23:00, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- I am afraid I am one of those who has fallen for that "superficial, fallacious liberal logic" in my quest to be "long in academic degrees but short in intellectual achievements of [my] own". Any contributions I would make would be invariably biased towards neutrality, at the least. But I couldn't pass some of these articles without at least pointing them out so they can be improved. There must be at least someone with some background in literary studies who is competent to improve this... they could hardly make it worse. Bon chance, though.--Gigg 23:06, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- It's easy to criticize, but...
- Honestly, I'd add, but it seems like you know the subject better. It's not my specialty, really , so I'd rather someone who feels impassioned about it contributes. I could add "Atonement is a pretty good book," but, again...-MexMax 23:11, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- I understand, and I hope someone who is impassioned does stop by. I heard about this site on Wikipedia, and I think it is an interesting idea. Ultimately, however, I disagree with its intent, and do not think my contributions would be consistent with what is desired here (a conservative Christian viewpoint). I would not feel comfortable contributing, so the most help I feel I can give is by pointing out weaknesses. I don't know how many users there are here, though, so I am sure now that it has been pointed out the matter will be remedied soon enough. Bon chance.--Gigg 23:15, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- It's hard to make "literature" controversial :-). You're welcome to give it a try, but I understand your reluctance, while I don't think it's necessary. May the Wikibug bite you in the end... :-)-MexMax 23:22, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- I wouldn't have thought it was possible to politicize deconstruction either, but apparently it can be done. You seem good-natured, so I wish you well.--Gigg 23:25, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- It's hard to make "literature" controversial :-). You're welcome to give it a try, but I understand your reluctance, while I don't think it's necessary. May the Wikibug bite you in the end... :-)-MexMax 23:22, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- I understand, and I hope someone who is impassioned does stop by. I heard about this site on Wikipedia, and I think it is an interesting idea. Ultimately, however, I disagree with its intent, and do not think my contributions would be consistent with what is desired here (a conservative Christian viewpoint). I would not feel comfortable contributing, so the most help I feel I can give is by pointing out weaknesses. I don't know how many users there are here, though, so I am sure now that it has been pointed out the matter will be remedied soon enough. Bon chance.--Gigg 23:15, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- I am afraid I am one of those who has fallen for that "superficial, fallacious liberal logic" in my quest to be "long in academic degrees but short in intellectual achievements of [my] own". Any contributions I would make would be invariably biased towards neutrality, at the least. But I couldn't pass some of these articles without at least pointing them out so they can be improved. There must be at least someone with some background in literary studies who is competent to improve this... they could hardly make it worse. Bon chance, though.--Gigg 23:06, 21 February 2008 (EST)