Talk:The German Ideology

Page Organization

I created this page tonight. Initial thoughts concerning organization are as follows. It may be beneficial to add further sub-paragraphs to the page to break up long blocks. The German Ideology has many of these sub-headings and they are helpful but I did not include them. These serve to organize content and might provide some clarity and make the page easier to read. I would also like to add a metadata page so I can organize the page a bit more efficiently but I'm still learning Citizendium and am not sure how to proceed. After I complete the summary of the text, I intend to add some secondary citation and analysis but right now, considering the length (almost 700 pages) and importance of this text (fantastic exposition of historical materialism!), I'll wait on that and other improvements. Maria Cuervo 03:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

If you just add {{subpages}} to the very top of the article, stuff should appear to guide you through it. You can also go via the Metadata form once {{subpages}} has been added. John Stephenson 04:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --Maria Cuervo 11:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Citation

I have just been sitting here with my Chicago Style Manual and do not see that Ibid ever went away. What is the scholarly basis of banning ibid? I assume I am really missing something here since at the university it continues to be used it in scholarly work? It just seems tedious to repeat the title and name of the work over and over again since 'right now' this work comprises the only reference. Obviously as I begin to introduce secondary material the reference list will seem less odd, to my eyes anyway.

Due to the deafening silence concerning this new article I must assume that a) it is of little interest or else b) I've done an excruciatingly awful job of creating an article or c) everyone is busy right now preparing the spring garden. --Maria Cuervo 16:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Don't be discouraged by the lack of comment, Maria. In my experience it is the normal response of our fellow-Citizens. My own immediate reaction to it has been to wonder what sort of readership it is aimed at. Perhaps it would be a good idea to place a statement about that in a box above the lede, as I have done in History of economic thought? Nick Gardner 09:46, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Nick, the page is of great interest to students of Marx the philosopher. This text is the one most often assigned, along with the Communist Manifesto, to undergraduate philosophy students. I am a philosopher not an economist or political theorist so my focus on Marx always gears itself to the details of his philosophy. I think these details have a huge bearing on political and economic application of his thought.--Maria Cuervo 13:41, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Ibid is short for ibidem, Latin for "in the same place". So it should properly be used only where the exact same place is cited, i.e. the same page. If it's just the same source, the correct form is id, short for idem. Peter Jackson 09:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Maria, your reply excuses me, as a mere economist, from commenting on the substance of your article. It would be a kindness to warn others who are similarly unqualified, that the article is not for them. Nick Gardner 14:30, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Nick, I am not sure that that is entirely the case since the text is studied by various disciplines, not just philosophy. --Maria Cuervo 16:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Maria, I made the suggestion only because the article seems to be expressed in language that some readers will find it hard to read. Nick Gardner 21:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Understood. I have no objection to someone else taking a hand to the article, or to deleting it if it is inappropriate for CZ. I am still learning what works here. --Maria Cuervo 02:17, 7 April 2012 (UTC)