Talk:Insects in literature

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

Start

The subject of this article is extensive, including everything from Aesop's Fables to the insect literature of Japan, nursery rhymes and English literature in general. I have made a start by assembling materials on the major insect groups from existing articles, most of which I worked on in GA collaborations. I hope to replace these small sketches progressively with better coverage, starting with Lafcadio Hearn's Insect Literature on Japan and Ancient Greece. Editors with knowledge of any specialist area (maybe geographic, maybe of an insect group) are of course extremely welcome to join in. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category Insects in Art

True, art is part of culture, and the article is categorized accordingly: "Insects in culture", but couldn't it also be part of "Insects in art" since literature, (music, etc.) is one of the Arts? Cheers, Tortillovsky (talk) 17:32, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Um, then we'd end up with art in culture and culture in art ... Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chiswick Chap. Thanks for your attention. I'm not thinking of changing the categories; what I tried to express is that the article could be part of both categories (I understand that a more specific category may be contained in another). It might appear to be redundant, but I just thought that it would be valid to have it listed in both categories. In any instance, I hate to take more of your time. Maybe when the articles: "Insects in sculpture", "Insects in painting", etc. are finished, THEN I can put them all under a subcategory "Insects in the Fine Arts" or something to that effect :- ) Best regards, Tortillovsky (talk) 20:56, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's no big deal. I just don't think it makes a lot of sense, and we seem to agree it implies a tangled categorisation. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]