Talk:Literature

Scope and structure of this article

Editors have been struggling with this article for many years and I believe that much of the difficulty lies in a failure to obtain a proper consensus on the scope the article. After reading through previous discussion threads and external sources on the topic, I think the topic of literature is definitely within the metaphor of the story of the blind men and the elephant -- everybody approaches it from their own perspective. Thus this article has been dragged back and forth by various editors pulling the definition and scope one way another.

There are many sub-articles under the purview of literature including the broad categories (poetry and prose), as well the major genres, plus perhaps several other sections such as history, technique, law, awards, and certainly a section discussing the various definitions of the term "literature." Nearly all of those sections already have sub-articles of their own.

There are no WP firm guidelines on determining the scope of an article that I could find. There is a useful essay, WP:Out of scope, in which some thought has been given to the subject. Also, there is some useful information in WP:Article size and WP:Summary style. Of particular note is a quote from Out of scope that I think may apply here, "Artificially or unnecessarily restricting the scope of an article to select a particular POV on a subject area is frowned upon, even if it is the most popular POV."

For these reasons, I believe the scope of the article should be broad and this overview article on literature should include sections that briefly summarize each subtopic along with a "Main article" link to the sub-articles.

There was a disam hatnote added to the article years ago that suggested a more restricted scope and I don't think the edit was noticed and didn't obtain proper consensus, so I'm going to tweak that and maybe make a few other low-hanging-fruit tweaks that touch on scope and definition, but we really need to develop an actual consensus on this. This is a significant article in WP so I think more effort should go into getting it right. There isn't a lot of editor traffic on this talk page so I think this consensus-building process needs to develop over time to allow as many folks as possible to participate. (I've increased auto-archive aging to 90 days so threads don't get swept away.) Thoughts? Sparkie82 (Sparkie82|c) 06:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Doesn't the lede and definition sections already offer some guidance? The OED offers useful guidance. Rwood128 (talk) 13:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

On further thought, the definition section needs to be improved. Rwood128 (talk) 14:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

A couple more WP guide/essays that might be useful: WP:General overview article and WP:Broad-concept article. Also, it might be useful see what editors have done in other overview-type articles. I was reading Animals, which is certain a broad topic. It parallels some of the challenges editors face here. For example, the definition may refer to all animals including humans, or it may refer to only non-animals. Also, it is a categorization topic, with multiple levels and dimensions of sub-categorization. They had quite a few discussions there on these topics which may inform our discussion here. The WP guides I mentioned above also include some example broad-topic articles.Sparkie82 (t•c) 23:26, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles in other languages might offer further guidance, see for example Littérature; Literatur. Rwood128 (talk) 09:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Sparkie82 for encouraging me to try and improve this article, with your suggestions. Any further ideas or comments? 19:55, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Rwood128 (talk)

Thank you for the idea/links to the fr and de articles. I think they are very useful. The structure of the de article seems comprehensive and well thought out and the fr article has lots content on the history of the changing definition of the word literature. (Which fits the respective stereotypes of the two cultures as science/analytical thinking (de), and high degree of attention/concern for the language (fr) -- if it's PC for me to say that.)

I'm certainly not a domain expert on this, but I also thought that one method/criterion for determining whether a piece of writing is 'literature' is the ephemerality of its originally intended value. E.g., a newspaper and a sales receipt are not considered literature, in part because their usefulness is short lived. (Although any writing has historical value with time and a feature article in a weekly edition might be considered literature.) Anyway, this is 100% OR and perhaps somewhat off topic, but I didn't see this idea mentioned anywhere in the articles and thought it might be useful, if a source could be found that confirms the observation.) My personal bias is for a broader scope but I really don't care which direction this goes -- I just thought that the article would benefit by firmly defining its scope. Sparkie82 (t•c) 04:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I must look more closely at the French an=d German articles. Your comment on the different national approaches is most interesting. I started working on one section of the French article, but was put off when I realized it lacked citations, though it led the idea of a section on "Women and literature".

If one meaning of the word "literature" "is any collection of written work", I don't know whether the question of ephemerality really applies. Also, newspapers are in fact preserved in libraries and seen as a valuable historical source. Questions relating to "what is literature?", and "what is the value of literature?", do however, need to be more fully addressed in the 'Aesthetic section". Rwood128 (talk) 15:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you 223.191.26.5 (talk) 04:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Another means of classification

The final sentence of the opening of this article says that literature is classified according to whether it is poetry, prose or drama, according to historical period and according to genre. Should it also say that it is classified according to nationality? YTKJ (talk) 18:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Isn't this understood? It does say "any collection of written work", and in the body of the article there are references to literature in many languages, though some sections, perhaps, over emphasize English literature. Rwood128 (talk) 18:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Literary canon

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 23#Literary canon which editors watching this article may wish to join. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hananhrose5512. Peer reviewers: Hananhrose5512.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Literature and life

Literature broadly is any collection of written work, but it is also used more narrowly for writings specifically considered to be an art form, especially prose fiction, drama, and poetry. In recent centuries, the definition has expanded to include oral literature, much of which has been transcribed. Literature is a method of recording, preserving, and transmitting knowledge and entertainment, and can also have a social, psychological, spiritual, or political role. Literature, as an art form, can also include works in various non-fiction genres, such as biography, diaries, memoir, letters, and the essay. Within its broad definition, literature includes non-fictional books, articles or other printed information on a particular subject. Etymologically, the term derives from Latin literatura/litteratura "learning, a writing, grammar," originally "writing formed with letters," from litera/littera "letter". In spite of this, the term has also been applied to spoken or sung texts. Developments in print technology have allowed an ever-growing distribution and proliferation of written works, which now includes electronic literature. Literature is classified according to whether it is poetry, prose or drama, and such works are categorized according to historical periods, or their adherence to certain aesthetic features, or genre. There are a lot of great writers, like Alisher Navoi; William Shakespeare; Abdulla Kodiri; Geoffrey Chaucer and etc. Alisher Navoi is a great poet, statesman and the founder of Uzbek literature. His real name is Nizomiddin Mir Alisher. He wrote his poems under the pen-names of Navoi and Foni. Navoi is a great Uzbek poet, a representative of the Uzbek literature which is called Chigatoy leterature in the West. 85.202.193.233 (talk) 07:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA23 - Sect 201 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2023 and 14 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Artisticrush (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Artisticrush (talk) 17:50, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

ckmorgan60@Artisticrush 2601:240:CF00:3000:608F:E1F1:9AE2:AA45 (talk) 07:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

@[[User:Artisticrush| 2601:240:CF00:3000:608F:E1F1:9AE2:AA45 (talk) 07:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://genius.com/Yoasobi-monster-english-version-lyrics. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. NotAGenious (talk) 11:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

what is the background of the literature of edith e. avisala

what is the background of the literature of edith e. avisala 123.253.50.148 (talk) 00:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)