Don't move to Wiktionary
Although the present article is inadequate, an encyclopedia-class article is very much a possibility, and should be written. Marc Shepherd 13:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Is the term "apparatus criticus" still used outside of Classical Studies? That's the term I'm familiar with and I was surprised to see it not even referenced here. It probably deserves at least a mention and a redirect-from link when this article is expanded. 220.127.116.11 18:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- Added parenthetical comment to lead, and added new redirect from apparatus criticus.-Andrew c [talk] 21:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Critical apparatus and textual criticism in general are , majourly, the province of Classical Studies, and not only in historical development, but in scope and (by far) expertise. They are also far more fundamental to it than to any other area of study. The article, pointing to Shakespereana, is certainly inadequate. Aren't there any volunteers to rewrite it? 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I would vigorously dispute the premise that critical apparatus and textual criticism are mainly the province of Classical Studies. The method described in the article has been used for works of all periods. Shakespeare and Hamlet in particular was chosen as an example, simply because a lot of readers are likely to be familiar with it. There are multiple editions of Hamlet that use this type of apparatus.