Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction
Appearance
(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:MOSWAF)
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Would it be a good idea to add some plays? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
I've sometimes seen editors refer to this page to imply that citations are not needed for synopses of nonfiction works. If that is true, it should be clarified, as my understanding that the guidance here exclusively applies to fictional work and plot summaries, not nonfiction creative works. czar 11:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm assuming that if what you want to cite is clearly shown in the film then there is no need for a citation as the primary source itself is the source, however, if what is written in the plot section needs outside context, then yes, that should be cited. Gonnym (talk) 12:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm thinking primarily nonfiction books: history books, essay collections, biography and autobiography. They have claims that are based in the real world rather than imagination. Is the standard that they need to be sourced to secondary sources (like all other Wikipedia content) or does this fiction guideline on Plot/Synopses also apply to nonfiction? I can move this discussion to WP:V if better discussed there. czar 13:04, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- NOT#PLOT and WAF extend from the idea that we should not be over reliant on a primary source to discuss a topic in detail if there is not independent or secondary sources about that specific aspect of a topic. So the contents of a published work, fictional or not, are typically not the type of thing discussed at depth, (reviews may touch on one or two specifics but rarely engaging in a thorough discussion of the contents) so the principle that we should stick to short summaries for nonfiction should be true as well. Masem (t) 13:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm thinking primarily nonfiction books: history books, essay collections, biography and autobiography. They have claims that are based in the real world rather than imagination. Is the standard that they need to be sourced to secondary sources (like all other Wikipedia content) or does this fiction guideline on Plot/Synopses also apply to nonfiction? I can move this discussion to WP:V if better discussed there. czar 13:04, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- On the face of it, I’m inclined to agree that PLOT does cover non-fiction in a substantially similar way—and not require citations—but such a plot summary should of course be presented as the opinions, hypotheses, narratives or theories of the author (something like: “the author contends that X was the consequence of Y and Z”). The truth or consequence or mainstream acceptance of the work could easily be covered in a later section, with appropriate sourcing.
- I would still want to see examples though, because this sort of thing can be hard to discuss in the abstract. — HTGS (talk) 09:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Spinout articles about a singular topic
[edit]I noticed a sentence that was italicized for no apparent reason. It turns this was done 16 years ago. Is the statement in question even still true, let alone worthy of emphasis? 183.89.250.246 (talk) 02:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've rewritten that whole paragraph, as it seemed poorly worded. 183.89.250.246 (talk) 04:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)