Lincos |
:Hm... I have even less certainty about this one than I do about the previous questions. :) I think that there's nothing inherently wrong with it, but that one should be careful going about it. One possible pitfall is that literary analysis is often strongly rooted in opinion; I'd suggest making sure that you're either sticking to factual statements (pointing out objective similarities between Dune and other works of high fantasy, for example) or making sure to couch it in terms like "many scholars believe <blah>." :This may be covered in the various faqs and Wikipedia policy pages that are scattered around, I haven't done much searching. But another way to find out the general consensus about whether such things are appropriate is to just do it and see whether anyone complains. :) |
Some of the pages I've contributed to significantly are:
Acetylene Actaeon Amino acid Anthropomorphism Callisto Carbon chauvinism Charybdis Clanking replicator Circe Cruithne Daedalus Dyson sphere Edmonton Exon Exxon Freenet Genetic code Greek mythology Grue Intron Jack L. Chalker Lincos Lycanthropy Muppet Nagasaki Neoteny Pan RNA Sampo Scylla Sidehill Gouger Solar system (and practically all of the planets, moons, comets - whew!) Victor Von Doom Werewolf
Brian, please do me a favor and don't use the unicode symbols for the number sets throughout. This locks out people who haven't updated their fonts unnecessarily, since C works just fine and is understood by everybody in the field. How about if you just mention the character once, like I did on rational number? --AxelBoldt
Allrighty, I was just momentarily overcome by the fun of putting exotic characters into pages. :)
Thanks! I appreciate your responding. Let me beg your indulgence for one more. Is it appropriate to add literary analysis to entries on creative works? For example, see my Leaf by Niggle page. I was pondering adding to the Dune page (Why Dune is like High Fantasy), but I'm not sure it's appropriate.
-- Cayzle