Talk:Alphabet to E-mail: How Written English Evolved and Where It's Heading: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>DavidGoodman (judging which books) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Anyway, I don't care so much about this particular case so much as the general rules. Food for thought... --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 23:19, 5 November 2006 (CST) | Anyway, I don't care so much about this particular case so much as the general rules. Food for thought... --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 23:19, 5 November 2006 (CST) | ||
==how to judge== | |||
This one is relevant to our interests in general & I'm glad to know about it, because I want to see what she says about Email, because I don't think I agree. | |||
But in terms of policy one approach might be "List of important books in [ ] from WP, with a somewhat more standardized system: recommended classics/current treatises/best textbooks, or the like, and a few sentences of description. One way of doing it in practice might be from the bibliographies of the articles--for such links to be inserted there. It wouldn't have worked in WP because the reference lists are too erratic. But we could have a practice or annotating and marking a few items. | |||
People could simply read the articles, or skim them for the bibliographies, but I think in practice a list like this stimulates browsing. | |||
But let me also recommend Resources for College Libraries, see | |||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resources_for_College_Libraries | |||
I admit to some prejudice; I was involved in the project. If your university library doesn't have it yet, suggest they get it. :). | |||
Larry, shall I talk with the publisher about making the online version available to all our editors? | |||
[[User:DavidGoodman|DavidGoodman]] 23:37, 5 November 2006 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 00:37, 6 November 2006
Can we really have articles about every academic book that comes down the pike? Are there enough collaborators to keep an exhaustive, or even semi-exhaustive, database of such books in good order? Also, the title should be followed by "(book)"
Anyway, I don't care so much about this particular case so much as the general rules. Food for thought... --Larry Sanger 23:19, 5 November 2006 (CST)
how to judge
This one is relevant to our interests in general & I'm glad to know about it, because I want to see what she says about Email, because I don't think I agree.
But in terms of policy one approach might be "List of important books in [ ] from WP, with a somewhat more standardized system: recommended classics/current treatises/best textbooks, or the like, and a few sentences of description. One way of doing it in practice might be from the bibliographies of the articles--for such links to be inserted there. It wouldn't have worked in WP because the reference lists are too erratic. But we could have a practice or annotating and marking a few items.
People could simply read the articles, or skim them for the bibliographies, but I think in practice a list like this stimulates browsing.
But let me also recommend Resources for College Libraries, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resources_for_College_Libraries I admit to some prejudice; I was involved in the project. If your university library doesn't have it yet, suggest they get it. :).
Larry, shall I talk with the publisher about making the online version available to all our editors? DavidGoodman 23:37, 5 November 2006 (CST)