This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The plot summary is terrible for someone who's never read the books to comprehend. You don't define any of the terms used. It's very amateurish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.241.240.42 (talk) 13:28, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion
@Огненный ангел: I see that you have changed "duology" to "dilogy" across six different articles. I was going to simply revert these changes, but I wanted to provide a longer rationale than would fit in an edit summary. Regardless of what you believe the "correct" word is etymologically, the word used in these articles should be the one that is most commonly used in reliable sources. I have never seen the Six of Crows (or King of Scars) books called a "dilogy." Sources consistently refer to them as a "duology" ([1], [2], [3], etc), and therefore that is the word that should be used in these articles. (See also: WP:Advocacy.) Aerin17 (t • c) 18:35, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
We can agree that some of the Grishaverse novels are marketed as duologies and mention this fact in the article(s), but using this word elsewhere would be too much, in my opinion. Огненный ангел (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
It's not that they are marketed as duologies. It's that every source that talks about these books agrees that they are duologies. You disagree on what word people should be using, and that's fine, but Wikipedia's job is just to summarize what sources say.
Like, a friend of mine believes that the plural of moose ought to be meese, and she has a point, but that doesn't mean that she can go in and change it on every Wikipedia article about moose. Aerin17 (t • c) 00:27, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
