Talk:Crime fiction/Catalogs

From Citizendium
< Talk:Crime fiction
Revision as of 11:45, 9 January 2010 by imported>Hayford Peirce (→‎Format of catalogs: replies -- I'll put examples on each of the pages in question)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Catalogs [?]
 

Format of catalogs

How should the entries of the catalogs be arranged?

  • For Famous books I would suggest to list: Year it was first published - Title - Author (ordered by the year).
Agreed
  • For Famous detectives it is more difficult. Simply by last name? Or classify them first by "type" (private detective, amateur, ...)? Or geographical (Maigret in Paris, ...)? Or by time period? Or a combination of these? In any case, I think the author should be added.
By first name, last name of the detectives, then the author's name, then the time period in which the dectective operated, as per the publication of the books. A little more trouble, but not difficult for a mystery fan.
  • For the Prominent writers the alphabetical order is best, of course. But the format might need a change. (Perhaps year of birth should be added, too?). Concerning the title: Is "prominent" a good choice? (Will all entries be prominent?)
Alphabetical, last name, first name, with dates of birth and death, years only. The title is tough: Prominent, Well-known, Representative, Noted, etc. etc.? All in all, I think Prominent is best -- who really cares if some non-prominent ones sneak in. And what's prominent to an old geezer in the U.S.A., who grew up reading 1920 Brit books, may not be prominent to a gentleman in Vienna and vice-versa. Hayford Peirce 16:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

--Peter Schmitt 10:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)