Talk:List of Russian-language writers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Reshaping the list[edit]

I am going to rework this list and make it look like the List of Russian inventors or List of Russian artists. So, as a first step, I remove here all the red links.

That's it. When the good enough articles on these writers are created, they may be added into the list.
Greyhood (talk) 18:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

  • Says who? Your explanation is lousy. Please propose the move first and discuss it with other Wikipedians and then do it. Sorry, but I am going to restore the missing writers. KNewman (talk) 17:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I have created this template:
And I intend to fill it exclusively with high quality illustrated lists, like the already created and polished List of Russian inventors and List of Russian artists, and most of leaders-related lists. Obviously, red links are out of place in such lists, except the list of Russian rulers and alike, where all rulers should be listed in any case. At the same time the listing of some minor writers without articles on them is of virtually no use to readers. And remember there are much much much more readers than editors, and the articles are created primarily for readers, not editors. Greyhood (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

:I wouldn't revert your edits until I'll actually start major work on this list, making it looking like a table with portraits, info on writers, short listings of their notable works and some illustrations. And I hope nobody would object to such reshaping of this list.Greyhood (talk) 18:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Hm, after some cosideration I think it is appropriate to create the following separate articles: List of Russian language playwrights, List of Russian language journalists and List of Russian language novelists (novel defined as here, the whole conception is from here). These lists would include the most notable writers with existing articles on them, and this current List of Russian language writers would give links to the specific lists by literary field, with the combined listing left intact if you want so.Greyhood (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
This is exactly what I hate about Wikipedia - considering the red links to be of no use. Why people can't understand that they all have a simple and important purpose: firstly, when someone sees a red link, he or she may wonder who this person was and, secondly, a more knowledgeable editor may show up and write an article about this person. IMHO, red links often tend to strike curiosity and, as a consequence, creativity. Do as you please, for I no longer desire to argue with other editors about the usefulness of red links. It just happens too often, and I already regret that I refreshed the list. KNewman (talk) 04:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if I have disturbed you. I think that several red links in the article are no harm and can make someone want to round up the perfectness of the article by creating a new articles on those links, or stubs. But when you see about hundred red links at a time, you just want to quickly take your eyes away from such article. Greyhood (talk) 15:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)