Talk:Collected editions of Shakespeare: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Peter Jackson
(New page: {{subpages}} I wrote this article on Wikinfo. Nobody else contributed to it, so there's no need for an acknowledgment. ~~~~)
 
imported>Peter Jackson
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:


I wrote this article on Wikinfo. Nobody else contributed to it, so there's no need for an acknowledgment. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 11:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I wrote this article on Wikinfo. Nobody else contributed to it, so there's no need for an acknowledgment. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 11:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
RationalWiki have some criticisms of this article at [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki_talk:What_is_going_on_at_Citizendium%3F#Collected_editions_of_Shakespeare].
These are matters of judgment. There are a very large number of editions (maybe I'll get round to a bibliography subpage), so a sensible article has to be selective in the material it includes. I thought the best plan was the one followed here:
#detailed account of the first edition
#summary of development
#intermediate amount of detail on the present-day situation
[[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 08:53, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:53, 18 June 2013

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Definition [?]
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Please add a brief definition or description.
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Literature [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English
To do.


Metadata here


I wrote this article on Wikinfo. Nobody else contributed to it, so there's no need for an acknowledgment. Peter Jackson 11:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

RationalWiki have some criticisms of this article at [1].

These are matters of judgment. There are a very large number of editions (maybe I'll get round to a bibliography subpage), so a sensible article has to be selective in the material it includes. I thought the best plan was the one followed here:

  1. detailed account of the first edition
  2. summary of development
  3. intermediate amount of detail on the present-day situation

Peter Jackson 08:53, 18 June 2013 (UTC)