Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels/Short story task force

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Documentation

[edit]

This is talk page associated with the WikiProject Short story task force belonging to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels. It is used as a discussion forum for the task force.

Discussion for the Short story task force

[edit]

Dr.Moogerbil and Dr.McNully

[edit]

we need to add to the list a collection of short stories by Dr.Moogerbil and Dr.McNully, there short stories are soo funny and doesent make any sense, on the contrary they have sufisticated Philosophy for this time in age

DrMoogerbil 18:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who

[edit]

None of the Doctor Who categories need to be here as they all list either full novels (though some of the novelizations are considered novellas) or audio dramas or televised episodes. None of them cover short stories per se. 23skidoo 22:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Condensed banner needed

[edit]

I tried adding the SS Task force tag to an article as per instructions on the project page, but instead of simply adding a line to the banner it instead placed the big blue monster of a TOC as seen on the project page. Is there a way to make a succinct line that appears on the NovelsWikiProject banner instead of replacing the banner -- along with its assessment scale information, I might add -- with the big TOC? 23skidoo 22:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The documentation was slightly incorrect - I have added the correct template to the task force page now, but you need to use {{NovelsWikiProject}} qualified with "|short-story-task-force=yes". Sorry for the confusion. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now it works. Thanks! I've added the tag to all the applicable Simon Templar, William S. Burroughs, Modesty Blaise and James Bond articles that I've worked on, as well as a few others. 23skidoo 20:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date categories

[edit]

I noticed that most of the categories listed in the section Category:Short stories by year are non-existent or near empty. Would it be possible to create or incorporate into a template that would automatically place the short story in the category corresponding to a user-specified year? Foxjwill 00:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question: is this category only for the dates of the actual stories themselves, or their publication. There have been a couple of cases now where collections that originally resided in a category such as "YEAR books" has been moved to "YEAR short stories" even though the year given is not necessarily the year the story was written or even first published. I think a standard should be set that date categories should only be used for articles on specific short stories, and not short story collections, etc. 23skidoo 05:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To be consistent with other books and novel date categories this this shoud relate to year of publication. If they are not published they have no true "existence" yet in the public arena. However there could be a case for using writing date "if known" (and it often isn't) when unofficial "released and "leaked out". But these would be rare. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

short story infobox

[edit]

I've created a short story infobox at {{Infobox short story}} - this seems like an appropriate place to mention it. I created it because many of the sections for the book infobox just didn't apply, and some needed to be added. -User:Elizabennet | talk 21:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice contribution - I have added in publisher as this may not be present elsewhere and also I believe the subject field is redundant and short stories are almost without exception fiction. For our purposes anyway they are fiction. Genre covers what we need. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have set up a page for this infobox with pattern code to insert for a new article. I have also added some documentation to the template in the "talk page". :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many months later, the only suggestion I have for this infobox is the lack of an image field. I know nothing about how to update infoboxes but I'm thinking it's an easy fix (if people think it's worth it). In the meantime I have been using the Wikiproject Books template as a temporary substitute. --Midnightdreary 19:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The reasoning here was Short stories are (extremely) rarely published as seperate books and therefore do not warrant a cover image. If it was published seperately then the Book infobox is probably relevant. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genre naming

[edit]

I have just nominated the "by type" to change to "by genre" see. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_16#Category:Short_stories_by_type :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Novellas

[edit]

The recent renaming of short stories-by-author categories reminded me of a question I've been meaning to ask. Are novellas considered "short stories" as far as the purview of this task force? If not, then there are a number of novella-related articles I've created that should probably be recatagorized, etc. 23skidoo 18:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, and a moot point. Personally I would have treated novellas as a "short" novel and thus part of the "general" project. I would bunch "novelettes" and "short stories" together as within scope of the "short story task force". It might be worth formalising this a bit on agreement to make things clear. I don't have a firm view on this, it is just how I think and have been working. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it goes back to what is a novelette and what is a novella, I suppose. Going back to my personal "Wikiproject" re:The Saint, the average length of one of Charteris' novellas -- at least in terms of page count; I have no idea what the word count would be -- is between 60 and 100 pages, which obviously varies depending on the typeface, etc. used in a particular edition. One novella was even later republished in the 1970s on its own as a full and separate "novel". It's no big deal in the long run. 23skidoo 14:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I second Kevin with the groupings of novellas and novellettes. I do think that perhaps we need to get an agreement on what's a novelette, what's a novella, and what's a novel (e.g. short story is <a pages, novellette is a-b pages, novella is b-c, and novel is >c) for future simplification (you never know what's going to start an edit war, sadly). -Elizabennet | talk 16:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Difficult one to set in stone, I would tend to go with "popular usage" but if there needs to be a guideline the definitions in the wiki articles lead to :-
However due to a loose popular usage beyond such boundaries perhaps we should use the commonly used term for the item and then say something like ".... or novelette length" if the word count is in that range. Also the problem would be researching what the word count is for a piece, not sure how many times I count and read at the same time! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those four categories defined by word count are used to define the science fiction Nebula Awards and now also iiuc Hugo Awards.

WP classification seems to put short story collections in "novels" categories, using "novels" broadly to mean perhaps "fiction books". The same may be true for single short fictions (is that plural permitted?) of any length. --P64 (talk) 02:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Short story article pattern template

[edit]

We soon could do with a Short story article pattern template and maybe a different one for Short story collections and anthologies. Ideally based on the style of the "novel" example but probably trimmed and tuned to "short story" requirements. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short story collections

[edit]

On the short story collections categories: I was wondering if we should add a category for Stephen King short story collections. He has a few, but I'm not sure if the category is necessary; thoughts? -Elizabennet | talk 16:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm, He has 14 books in Category:Short story collections by Stephen King and loads in Category:Short stories by Stephen King not to mention his novels i think that is enough. I'm sure he's going to keep writing them. It does raise another question about Category unifomity like was discussed in the Novels talk page. Should we have it as Category:Short Story collections by XXXX or Category:XXXX short story collections? Jask99 19:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Std name already established, if missing it should be Category:Short story collections by Stephen King, go for it! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edgar Allan Poe

[edit]

I'd like to help with short stories by Edgar Allan Poe - in fact, I'm willing to take care of all of them - but I'm not sure how well the infobox works (maybe I'm not understanding it). For example, "Released in" implies it was in an anthology, but all of his first printings were in magazines... which would also be the "Published by" line... I think. And I'm confused by "Media type," "Preceded by" and "Followed by." Should I leave those out? Midnightdreary 16:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Released in - should give the "name" of the publication it first was published in - in your example the name of the magazine.
Published by - should give the initial publisher's name - (not quite the same thing as the mugazine name - normally)
Media type - should give the forms it is available in ie. "Print (Magazine, Hardback, Paperback) & E-Book" for example.
Admittedly it is difficult to come up with terms that are clearly used by everone as across the planet we are so "loose" with our terminology. Anymore questions!? :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 17:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're getting somewhere. I'll see what I can do later tonight or maybe tomorrow. Someone keep an eye on me and make sure I don't mess up. :) Midnightdreary 17:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a specific location we should be putting WikiSources? I've been putting them under the Summary section as opposed to External Links. Midnightdreary 17:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When does a short story deserve its own article?

[edit]

I was just looking through the article for the The Green Hills of Earth (short story collection). All of the stories in that collection have a seperate article, several of which are only a paragraph or two summarizing the plot. All of these stories have been republished in other places many in another collection The Past Through Tomorrow. But does that make them worthy of an article?

I am tending towards no, and I would like to cull some of the full articles back into descriptions in the articles for the collections. But I would like to hear what other think before I do anything. Andrew Sullivan Cant 06:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

normal notability rules would apply although, short stories tend to be less visible outside of a collection or anthology than full novels. Criticism, reviews, citations etc are all still needed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent clean-ups, peer review for SS?

[edit]

I've recently begun looking for short stories that needed a firm hand and a good copy-editing job, and over the past couple days I've worked extensively on both Mimsy were the Borogoves and Stephen King's The Body (novella). Mimsy stands to receive a fair amount of attention once its film adaptation (The Last Mimzy) is released in the US tomorrow, and The Body was dismal before today. Because this task force is still relatively new, I wasn't sure how we're supposed to go about asking for second opinions/peer reviews, and I would definitely love some involvement in either or both of these articles, so I'm posting here for lack of better options. If anyone can lend a hand, certainly someone who has been a part of this task force longer than I have (just joined today!), that would be great. I'm still on the lookout for other clean-up jobs, as well, so hope to see everyone around. :) María: (habla conmigo) 21:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look at both and they are coming on. The main need I can see is for "in-line" citation (i.e. footnotes) and references, particularly on the "King" novella which doesn't have any!. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

[edit]

I would suggest (at least for the present) that any requests for peer review go to the main "Novels" project peer review. At least we can start there. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short story pattern template

[edit]

We have pattern templates for standard novel articles, and fictional characters. As we have numerous short story articles now tagged it is probably about time we established a "Short Story" pattern template. Something like the "Novels" one but tuned more to the needs of the short story. This may lead to a "Short story collection" one. Thoughts please. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely! I'm running into a lot of them that are such a mish-mash of info, some kind of uniform template would be fabulous. I'd also like to see the infobox in a more accessible place; I always end up losing it, wherever it is. Nevermind, it's to the right; I'm an idiot. :) María: (habla conmigo) 17:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. With the fine-tuning, though, I'd suggest keeping it simple as (no offense) short stories tend to be simpler than novels. The fewer sections, for example, the less likely we'll have empty or mostly empty spaces. :) Midnightdreary 17:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
None taken, heh. I agree that the template would be more condensed. Looking at the novel template, I can see that short stories may not need both a plot summary and intro, since short stories and novellas are generally much shorter and do not need extensive plot explanations. Other than that, themes, allusions, trivia, adaptations... these things may apply to some lengthy articles, but not to others. María: (habla conmigo) 17:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, for Poe articles, I've been using the following: Plot summary, Analysis (or Major themes, or both), Publication history, Adaptations (i.e. film, tv), and very rarely Inspiration (for the story). Midnightdreary 17:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Katherine Mansfield

[edit]

I would be interested in working on short stories by Katherine Mansfield perhaps. Her page doesn't have a list of all her short stories, which I think could be interesting. Not sure where this can be found though. I could start a list from the 'Selected Stories' in Oxford World's Classics, that I have...Then create a page for each story, with a plot summary...Anyway, although her page doesn't have a list of all she wrote, I have retrieved this [1] from [2]...That would be a bit of work though, it would be good if I wasn't the only one on to this goal.Zigzig20s 16:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I highly recommend navigation boxes if you start making articles for her stories. They're fun and useful! See Template:Edgar Allan Poe, for example. I didn't make it, but it's great! Midnightdreary 17:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the following pages (aside from a few ones which already existed) :

Please make a navigation box if you know how to. There are lots more short stories by her btw.Zigzig20s 19:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Title formatting

[edit]

Is it convention across the board in English to put short story titles in quotes? I'm having a conversation with another editor that suggests that Wikipedia policy says all titles should be in italics. I'm arguing that that's only for books and movies not, for example, a poem or short story. The policy only names songs and chapter titles as an exception but it doesn't seem like a thorough policy. Am I wrong to be changing short story titles in italics? --Midnightdreary 03:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna go ahead and suggest the argument that all titles must be in italics doesn't have a leg to stand on. I just found this: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles). Feel free to comment anyway. --Midnightdreary 03:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of the meaning of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles) is as follows: Book titles, ie Novels and Novellas published separately should be bold italics (e.g. War and Peace) and Short Stories and Novelettes - the type of length that are normally published as part of a collection should be bold in quotes (e.g. "The Death of Ivan Ilyich"). Does that help at all? :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems crystal clear now but why would it be bold? I'm assuming you mean at the top of an article for that particular work? I was mostly concerned in mentions of works in other articles. This debate started with a minor revert war where I kept trying to change The Gold Bug on the Sullivan's Island, South Carolina article to "The Gold-Bug" and another editor kept changing it back saying it was against policy. Your response does lead me to another question, though. At the first mention of the story in its article, should it be "The Gold-Bug" or "The Gold-Bug"? I think typically I have not been including the quotation marks in bold. --Midnightdreary 13:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In the other locations the norm would be to italisize Novels and Novellas and to put " marks round Short stories and Novelettes, leaving the Bold out. On the bolding of the quote makrs "i don't know" but I myself have been including them "in" as bold. I don't think the guidelines make this one clear. It might have been an oversight. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's late in the game, but I found this: WP:PUNC. --Midnightdreary 14:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone is interested

[edit]

If anyone is interested, I'm now maintaining the brand new Portal:Edgar Allan Poe. Contributors welcome. --Midnightdreary 19:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments

[edit]

Does this task force make assessments (i.e. B-Class, A-Class) on relevant articles, or should it go to the parent project, WikiProject Novels? --Midnightdreary 14:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

currentl under the parent, however if others are willing to put in the effort it could be admined here. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User box

[edit]
This user enjoys reading short stories.

I found this today and just wanted to point it out here! --Midnightdreary 18:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quotation marks and commas

[edit]

Curious situation arose - the first time I saw this. But, an editor has said that listing works which are in quotation marks should leave commas outside the quotes. For example, use "The Fall of the House of Usher", "The Murders in the Rue Morgue", etc. rather than "The Fall of the House of Usher," "The Murders in the Rue Morgue," etc. WP:PUNC seems to suggest the first is correct, but I would suggest that using common sense outweighs the ambiguity in the Manual of Style. Any thoughts here? --Midnightdreary (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The amazing thing about common sense is that there appears to be so little of it about. Anyway "The Fall of the House of Usher", "The Murders in the Rue Morgue", etc. is the proper way to go. It is not explicitly mentioned in the manual of style except when touching another subject. See WP:PUNC#Quotation_marks under the "Straight or Curly?" section. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For titles, you might consider avoiding the issue entirely by using rich text markup, i.e. italics. Could anyone object to The Fall of the House of Usher, or to The Murders in the Rue Morgue? (sdsds - talk) 05:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Err... you mean, besides the Manual of Style? LOL Short story titles should always be in quotations. See MOS:TITLE#Quotation marks. =) --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

short stories by Willa Cather

[edit]

I've been creating pages for short stories by Willa Cather (Category:Short stories by Willa Cather) and am not gonna try to go through them all. One of them (Eric Hermannson's Soul) just got tagged for notability. Willa Cather is a major author and we have this short story taskforce, can the tag be removed? Notice that the person who added the tag seems to be well into deleting pages, as per User talk:Jfire and [3]... BTW if anyone wants to help me expand the pages, please do - there needs to be info on criticism added to them.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have removed the tag. But the best form of defense in this cases is to demonstrate or argue notability in the article itself. So if you can find and real world material on reception, awards etc and referencing please do add it. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to add a literary significance and criticism section after I've created a page for all of her short stories and novels...when I get the time! Thank u for removing the tag.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Now, hang on... do you really think there needs to be an article for all of her short stories and novels? Surely, there are some that are more important than others. I'd say focus on those ones first. My personal opinion is that quality is more important than quantity. This comes from my own experience here; I originally tried, like you, to make sure there was an article for every work by my favorite author (in my case, Edgar Allan Poe). Now, over a year and a half later, I look at all these stubs or start-class articles which have had almost no improvement or expansion since they were created and I'm kinda disappointed. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At least there is a plot summary and a list of characters and intertextuality. It's useful.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Although I am no deletionist I find I do have to agree with Midnightdreary about the quality issue. If you could add to these issues first before the quantity, that would be really great. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's a work in progress...My notes are useful if u want to compare some short stories in terms of intertextuality or if u can't remember what they're about...I'm sure there'll be criticism to add - as I did for Paul's Case or A Gold Slipper - but I believe that the notes I've added for most of them is still useful for research in literature.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone is suggesting it's not useful information. We're just saying that having a whole bunch of fairly useful articles is nothing compared to a small number of highly useful articles. It's a matter of opinion, of course. But then throw in questions of notability, and you have another question entirely. For example, I don't see the need to create an article on Poe's "Three Sundays in a Week" or "Bon-Bon" - I'm sure they'd be useful articles, but they're nowhere near as important as "The Tell-Tale Heart" or "The Fall of the House of Usher". See my point? --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I would urge u to create them if u can. Of course I'm saying this from a postgrad's point of view.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly can create them... I'm just not sure that I should. Read WP:NOTABILITY. Beyond that, I'd still argue quality over quantity. But do what you will; no one is stopping you! --Midnightdreary (talk) 16:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think a notable writer would make their writings notable. I would think a 'short story taskforce' would second that, but never mind...Zigzig20s (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

I wanted to bring us back to the discussion above. Zigzig does bring up an important point: does the author of a story automatically make that story notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia? I recently saw two new articles on Poe stories created, The Business Man and Bon-Bon - both of which are inferior minor stories, but the fact that Poe himself is a "vital" article implies something... But I'll still make the argument that these articles will always be struggling around stub or start class. I'd rather see The Tell-Tale Heart or The Purloined Letter be fleshed out further.

According to notability policy: The common theme in the notability guidelines is the requirement for verifiable objective evidence to support a claim of notability. Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines. So, what can we do as a short story task force to figure this one out? --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been adding more referenced criticisms. I think it is a pretty safe assumption that most short stories by well-known authors are bound to have been delved into by critics and academics.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that short stories are no different than novels when it comes to notability: if the author is particularly notable, then the stories become de facto notable. In the case of Poe this is particularly true, but I contest that the individual short stories of, say, Ian Fleming are just as worthy of individual articles. (The only reason they are not is because in the case of Fleming his short stories are primarily associated with the books in which they are collected, so it makes sense to group them together; if he didn't collect them, then we'd have separate articles, especially with projects such as Quantum of Solace. The problem I have with some of the notability guidelines (not policy, I must add - the two terms are not interchangable) is that it requires violation of WP:NPOV to make a determination regarding what is notable and what isn't. The lack of references mean nothing - it doesn't mean there aren't any, 9 times out of 10 it just means that the sources aren't online. But there may well be a reference (going back to Poe) sitting in some dusty book dated 1912 in a library in Dearborn, Michigan for all we know. And a few times when I've seen short stories (and even novels) nominated at AFD, a case could be made that the nominator is demonstrating WP:OSTRICH. Am I saying every single short story deserves an article? Not necessarily. But I don't agree with any sort of blanket statement over what's allowed and what isn't. 23skidoo (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think 23skidoo makes a lot of sense here. Notability should be defined, at least in part, by common sense (in addition to the notability policy. My common sense tells me that some of these stories just aren't deserving of an article. Sure, we could add them... but why? Besides, a lot of them end up being just plot summaries (one of the things "wikipedia is not"). Would it be too much to ask that articles prove their notability with three scholarly/academic sources? I think I'm just rambling now... --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I totally disagree on the three scholarly sources thing. To my mind, Wikipedia is a work in progress; scholarly sources will be added as people open books and stumble upon them - because they are out there, I don't think it would be realistic to deny that.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree all you want. But the multiple scholarly sources thing isn't my idea... it's policy. In fact, it's the definition of notability as used on Wikipedia. See WP:N. --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not policy. It's a guideline. I just double-checked WP:N and that hasn't changed, and it says clearly on the banner that it's not set in stone. Policy is something set in stone, for example WP:BLP. The whole notability thing is a textbook case of people confusing policy with guideline. 23skidoo (talk) 16:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, good catch. --Midnightdreary (talk) 20:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I realise it's actually quite easy to find criticisms on google books.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi there. I'm new to WikiProjects and Task forces. I was wondering if someone could point me to an article about a short story that has reached featured status. There are a lot of stubs that I am interested in improving and I'd like to have an article to use as my model. Let me know. --Survivalism (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that there are any FA-class "short stories" however there is at least one GA-class story, "The Murders in the Rue Morgue", which would be a good place to start. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it gives us something to shoot for... we should really get some FA articles! Other projects also sometimes include a "featured content" section of their project page. Maybe we could consider adding one here? --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it - we need at least one article before we can warrant a section though. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at WP:POETRY#Recognized content - that might make a good model. We have one GA and at least a couple DYKs. I'm sure we can find more. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good - "beg, borrow or steal" it, modify and add to the page as you see fit. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good - no it is there - shame we only have EAP stories to include we obviously have some work to do. Any aritcle suggestions to work on to get improved. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if we can get short story to at least GA status? I'll poke around the short story articles and see if there's anything close. --Midnightdreary (talk) 12:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help with this question. I plan to start expanding some articles on Borges' short stories. I'll let you know when I have done a few so you can look and tell me what you think. --Survivalism (talk) 01:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Short Story

[edit]

I was wondering whether it would be possible to get my own short story that i wrote put onto this task force somehow. I accept that it may be impossible or not allowed, but still. Tom.mevlie (talk) 04:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • If your short story is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article (based upon the current standards here), then it's eligible for any applicable wikiproject. But you need to make sure it satisfies notability requirements, and if it's your own piece, there are some retsrictions on people doing articles on their own work. You pretty much need a fair amount of verifiable third-party sources discussing your work, and ideally have someone else write the article. When articles are nominated for deletion one of the first things people look for is who created the article. My best suggestion is to indicate what story you're referring to and provide a few online or text sources to discussion about the story, and let a third party check it out, to ensure WP:NPOV and WP:NOR is maintained. 23skidoo (talk) 16:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tom, I'm trying to interpret what you're asking. If you're looking for a place to publish an original piece, it's not Wikipedia for a couple reasons. For one thing, it's an encyclopedia, not a literary journal, a publisher of original thought or, as I'm assuming, original fiction. Even if we thought this task force was a good place to publish your full, previously unpublished, original story, I wouldn't recommend it anyway because everything on Wikipedia is published under the GNU free license - meaning it'd be out of copyright. I'm not sure if I'm helping, but I gave it a shot. --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question re: scope

[edit]

I want to make sure I'm not going overboard here -- with respect to short story authors, should we categorize them on the main page but NOT use the Project tag on the talk page? Aristophanes68 (talk) 09:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currently authors (see relevant WPP:BIO) are out of scope. I can't remember the history but I think the writers / author were included in the category list as an aid to editor to find the short story articles themselves. Hope that answers your question. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References for short stories?

[edit]

Hi all, I've been working on a short story article, while also looking for good ones I could use as a template (I asked this question above). I've noticed that many short stories include a link to the full text of the story online, if it is freely available. But for stories that are not in the public domain, do we cite the specific edition that we read?

I have also noticed that many short story articles don't include specific quotations from the text. Is this standard for short story articles? Sorry if these questions seem kind of obvious; I just couldn't find the answers anywhere. Thanks. --Survivalism (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I totally understand your meaning but I will try to answer.
  • "do we cite the specific edition". if you need to refer to it Yes! (in-line citation, or general reference) also if you are giving anything in a publication details section.
  • "many short story articles don't include specific quotations" this is only useful to tell people something about the story that needs illustration. For short fiction this is a bit more sensitive as the proportion of the copyright material copied is higher than for longer fiction. Quotations from 3rd parties of a real world nature are far, far better.
Hope these help. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would reiterate Kevin's concern with copyright. But in giving a short plot summary, you may quote when it adds more than a summary could offer. In analysis, your quotes would probably not be from the story itself but from other published sources which, again, can be re-written into your own words. I've seen before someone try to write an analysis using the story itself as the source, quoting heavily to prove their point, but that falls under original research, which you can't do. Between the two of us, I hope your question has been answered! --Midnightdreary (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

definition

[edit]

How do we decide what a short story is? Is it less than x words or what?DangerTM (talk) 04:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly before we have used the definitions in the Novelette and Short story articles. If the borders of scope are unclear then to some extent that is the "nature of the beast". All semi-scientific definitions of the artistic endeavour are at best going to be open to debate, at worst impossible. We do perhaps need to be consistent with other definitions to be found in wikipedia's main article on the subjects. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creatures of Impulse

[edit]

Does Creatures of Impulse look like it should be part of this task force? It's relatively new (about two or three months?) and was recently promoted to Featured Article. If it's part of this task force, it'd be our first FA! --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

[edit]

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Short story task force

[edit]

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality vs. language

[edit]

I just saw that the short stories of Franz Kafka were listed under "German short stories" in the list of "Short stories by nationality". Franz Kafka was a member of a German-speaking jewish minority in present-day Czech Republic -- not in Germany. Stricly speaking, I guess he should be listed as a Czechoslovakian author. Or? 62.194.97.180 (talk) 11:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be sorted. Difficult area nationality! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article alerts

[edit]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:40, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Enemy Mine

[edit]

Can someone look at Enemy Mine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ? Someone wants to roll Enemy Mine (film) onto it. I think it was improperly merged away, since someone merged it into a new anthology The Enemy Papers (2005), while this novella was published in 1980, and republished in longer novel form in the 80's; and it is a Hugo and Nebula award winner so should have sufficient notability to stand on its own. I don't think the anthology has sufficient notability to survive a deletion challenge. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 07:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone moved it to Enemy Mine (novella) and I've restored the article. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 07:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

[edit]

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

  1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
  2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

[edit]
List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 02:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced living people articles bot

[edit]

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Short story task force/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you. Okip 02:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Troll Bridge

[edit]

In an attempt to re-open the Discworld Portal I am starting to clean up the articles. However, I have found that most of the short stories are a bit of a mess and need complete revamps. To this end, I was hoping someone (or better still a few people) could do a basic assessment on the re-vamp of Troll Bridge and leave the results either on the discussion page or my talk page. Thank you.Where is WikiResearch? (talk) 17:02, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Monkey and the Cat

[edit]

Can I bother you to take a look at this article now its scope has been widened. In view of the fable's enigmatic origin, investigation into which is still ongoing, it would be good if you could raise its importance level particularly. Thanks, Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 14:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrade to mid class. See inquiry redirected to Requesting an assessment - Barkeep
Thank you. Hopefully that may spark more research on the subjct. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 19:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Short story collection

[edit]

Is there any guideline or wise discussion of format for articles on collections, primarily after the articles have advanced beyond listing the story titles? Four examples

I am responsible for all of the current formats except formal subheadings and plain font sentence fragments with previous publication data, which another editor recently introduced at First Fall. --P64 (talk) 03:00, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at In Our Time (book). I stalled on it because I wasn't sure how to organize, but generally I think that's right direction to take. It's hard not being listy. Truthkeeper (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The collection In Our Time by Hemenway seems to be a different type in some respects that are important here. For example, the now-famous author was almost unpublished and unknown; the collection was an important work considered as a whole.
The extreme opposite type, also different from those I have featured, may be represented by The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. More than six years ago (during year 2005), articles on the constituent stories individually were developed to match or surpass the "collection article" in size and surpass it in finish (eg, with the dedicated {{Holmes infobox}}). The collection article text is now quite short and it covers the individual stories simply by a list of links to the twelve story articles. --P64 (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Format for coverage of each collected story

[edit]
After beginning to rewrite my original -12-20 note, I realized that that is inappropriate because there has been a substantial reply. Now I have replied on the general theme above and this is a second edition of the original with sharper focus on the format.

I am responsible for the present format (2011-12-28) of these three articles on short story collections except at First Fall where another editor recently introduced formal subheadings for the individual stories and full-size, plain-font sentence fragments with previous publication data.

Parenthetically I have linked to the most recent versions before my time.

All three collections provide back-story for successful series of novels (five, about twenty, and seven novels respectively). The former two were published after Prydain and Pern were award-winning and immensely popular fictional worlds; the latter two collected stories that had been previously published (most of them). It's likely that these stories received little critical attention and that they will never have their own articles.

Are there any policies violated by these three linked ways of developing formally primitive content such as Pegasus version 2011-06-07)? Are there any pertinent guidelines? If not, I solicit words of wisdom. It may be appropriate to comment at the three Talk pages. --P64 (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look when I have a chance - hopefully soon. I'm very familiar with all of McCaffrey's work, so that helps. I'll post to the relevant talk pages. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I read nothing by Anne McCaffrey until this year! (! in context).
By the way, my sandbox now shows four ways to lay out identical information about stories in series --four ways for a list of titles to grow up, as titles with bits of previous publication data acquire story synopses. --P64 (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wife of His Youth

[edit]

FYI: I just put up Charles W. Chesnutt's story "The Wife of His Youth" up for Good Article review. Any feedback is welcome. --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Literature Online Access

[edit]

Hello all! At The Wikipedia Library we are currently in talks with Proquest's Literature Online and Early English Books Online to get Wikipedians access to those databases/collections. They asked us for a bit of information about how Wikipedians might use the research materials, asking us to do a brief survey. It would be extremely helpful if users could fill out the following Google form: Proquest - Literature Online / Wikipedia Library user interest survey. Afterward, while waiting for us to finish talks on Literature Online, we would like to invite editors to apply for already established available partnerships, listed at our partners page. Thank you for all of your help! Sadads (talk) 16:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stub cat proposal for stories & collections

[edit]

Please weigh in at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2014/September#Century_stubs_for_short_stories_and_short_story_collections. Thanks, Aristophanes68 (talk) 01:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Expert attention

[edit]

This is a notice about Category:Novels/Short story task force articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 22:40, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to our April event

[edit]
You are invited...

Women Writers worldwide online edit-a-thon

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:06, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Translations of short story collections by author

[edit]
    Firstly, I'm greatly surprised that noted American author Ray Bradbury is completely missing from this article(s) lists of short story authors/writers.  See the long en.Wikipedia.org article "Ray Bradbury" regarding that authors qualifications to be included in your task force's listings.

    Secondly, I am currently doing a bi-lingual (German to English) translation of "Der Tod kommt schnell in Mexico" (R.Bradbury:"A Memory of Murder", (c)1984 by Ray Bradbury, (c)1988)Diogenes Verlag AG Zürich). While the task force lists authors by their nationality, there is no category to list the languages into which authors' short stories and collections have been translated.

    The German Wikipedia (de.wikipedia.org) has a shorter Bradbury article.  It lists Bradbury collections, among which there are fifteen German language translations (including my copy).

    I'm hopeful that in addition to adding a new category ("Translated works" perhaps) you can correct your omission of one of our very notable American short story authors.  K. Kellogg-Smith (talk) 15:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

[edit]

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate categories

[edit]
Resolved

Category:Single-writer short story collections and Category:Short story collections seem to have the same scope. I think the former should be merged into the later. ghouston (talk) 21:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do think the two categories are at least slightly different, as there certainly are short story collections with multiple contributing writers. Nevertheless, I see your point. --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The short story collections with multiple writers are being referred to as Category:Fiction anthologies: Category:Short story collections says "This category includes works that collect short stories by a single author." ghouston (talk) 01:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Splitting hairs here but my assumption is that the fiction anthologies category is intended for collections that include more than short stories? This may be worth pursuing at WP:CFD rather than at this project talk page. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CFD would be the next step, but I thought I'd ask here first. But at the moment, it doesn't seem that there's any support for merging them. I'd assume that Category:Single-writer short story collections and Category:Short story collections have the same scope regarding what kinds of stories can be included in the collections. My impression is that collections which include novelettes, etc., are still in scope. I'd like to know specifically which works should be members of one category, but not the other. Otherwise, their contents should be exactly the same. Looking at the entries in Category:Single-writer short story collections, they generally seem to also be in subcategories of Category:Short story collections. ghouston (talk) 21:36, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody proposed merging them at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_May_26#Category:Single-writer_short_story_collections and it has been done, so this is resolved. ghouston (talk) 11:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels/Short_story_task_force&oldid=1238815342"