Difference between revisions of "Talk:451: Impostor"
(Comment) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | I believe the multiple issues listed in the '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction Deconstruction]''' Wikipedia article speak for themselves: | ||
| + | |||
| + | :'''This article has multiple issues.''' Please help '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deconstruction&action=edit improve it]''' or discuss these issues on the '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Deconstruction talk page]'''. | ||
| + | :*This article '''contains [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:QUOTE too many or too-lengthy quotations] for an encyclopedic entry'''. (''February 2014'') | ||
| + | :*This article '''may be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vagueness confusing or unclear] to readers'''. (''February 2014'') | ||
| + | :*This article '''may be too [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/technical#Adjective technical] for most readers to understand'''. (''February 2014'') | ||
| + | :*This article's '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LEAD introduction] may be too long for the overall article length'''. (''February 2014'') | ||
| + | :*This article '''may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style quality standards]'''. (''February 2014'') | ||
| + | :*The '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view neutrality] of this article is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NPOV_dispute disputed]'''. (''February 2014'') | ||
| + | [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.5|199.27.133.5]] 20:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
It could be that no one understands the literary criticism, even if they read it. The panel shows a student listening to Cueball. A fun, alternative explanation is that Cueball has found his real niche! A natural genius in literary criticism! (I know that's not what he's driving at. Stick with my first explanation.)[[User:Theo|Theo]] ([[User talk:Theo|talk]]) 13:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC) | It could be that no one understands the literary criticism, even if they read it. The panel shows a student listening to Cueball. A fun, alternative explanation is that Cueball has found his real niche! A natural genius in literary criticism! (I know that's not what he's driving at. Stick with my first explanation.)[[User:Theo|Theo]] ([[User talk:Theo|talk]]) 13:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
I know this is easy to find, but the wikipedia article on deconstruction is very relevant. There should be a link in the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.7|108.162.219.7]] 01:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC) | I know this is easy to find, but the wikipedia article on deconstruction is very relevant. There should be a link in the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.7|108.162.219.7]] 01:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:10, 27 June 2014
I believe the multiple issues listed in the Deconstruction Wikipedia article speak for themselves:
- This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
- This article contains too many or too-lengthy quotations for an encyclopedic entry. (February 2014)
- This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. (February 2014)
- This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (February 2014)
- This article's introduction may be too long for the overall article length. (February 2014)
- This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (February 2014)
- The neutrality of this article is disputed. (February 2014)
199.27.133.5 20:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
It could be that no one understands the literary criticism, even if they read it. The panel shows a student listening to Cueball. A fun, alternative explanation is that Cueball has found his real niche! A natural genius in literary criticism! (I know that's not what he's driving at. Stick with my first explanation.)Theo (talk) 13:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I know this is easy to find, but the wikipedia article on deconstruction is very relevant. There should be a link in the explanation. 108.162.219.7 01:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
