Talk:Love's Labour's Won: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:45, 7 April 2007

How much more can this article be expanded? It's a lost play, for which we only have the title, the source of which has been accurately denoted here. I'd like to take this off the stub list if there are no further objections. Dvyost 14:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There to tell the connection with Love's Labour's Lost, that play had no ending, rather a foreshadowing on four possible endings (maybe for the four men?), why don't you change stub status to expanding status placing an {{expand}} tag in the talkpage, or maybe an {{todo}} list with remaining issues. --145.94.41.95 19:36, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'll just add a mention of this (which is really speculation anyway) and take away the stub status entirely. Dvyost 21:24, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Doctor Who

I removed this line:

"This episode did make a mistake in depicting the play as being written in 1599; as noted above, it had already appeared in Meres's list of Shakespeare comedies in 1598."

Is this relevant? It offers no new information, and seems to me to serve only so that the author can prove how much he knows. - 82.34.48.197 23:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 :I'll just add a mention of this (which is really speculation anyway) and take away the stub status entirely. [[User:Dvyost|Dvyost]] 21:24, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
+== Doctor Who ==
+I removed this line:
+"This episode did make a mistake in depicting the play as being written in 1599; as noted above, it had already appeared in Meres's list of Shakespeare comedies in 1598."
+Is this relevant? It offers no new information, and seems to me to serve only so that the author can prove how much he knows.
+- [[User:82.34.48.197|82.34.48.197]] 23:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)