Talk:The Oak and the Calf

Russia: Language & literature Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the language and literature of Russia task force.

Books

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Soviet Union

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Russian Proverb?

Doesn't the title refer to a traditional proverb, though instead of a calf it involved a ram? Deep Atlantic Blue (talk) 06:46, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is not exactly "traditional" (i.e., not in widespread tradition). Solzhenitsyn is known to proudly overuse fancy obscure folklore and excessively "volksrussian" expressions. - üser:Altenmann >t 23:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bio cketch

Please explain now a piece of Solzh bio is useful here. Wikipedia is not paper. the whole bio is one mouse click away. - üser:Altenmann >t 09:33, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think we have the {{main article|}} template. Many articles contain a summary of a main article. If this article was over-long, I might understand deletion. But it's not. Since this article is about an autobiography, a short biography section is relevant. Graham Beards (talk) 11:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Summary style for the usage of "main article". You did not answer my question how exactly this short biography section is relevant to the topic (which is the book), i.e, what information about the book it adds to the article. We don't put writer biographies into articles about their books. - üser:Altenmann >t 23:00, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As the book is an autobiography, a short biographical outline is justified. With regard to "the whole bio is one mouse click away", I have seen quite a few users on my travels who, not being fortunate to have a broadband connection, can wait for several minutes for a page to load. Graham Beards (talk) 11:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

re "broadband" - irrelevant. THe same arhument is for each and every wikilink. Surely we will not put summaries of every wikilink into every article. - üser:Altenmann >t 18:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
re "as the book..." - disagreed. This your baseless opinion rather than an answer to my request. It would make sense if this outline were about the time period covered in the book or related to book writing. - üser:Altenmann >t 18:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You did not provide a convincing answer, but the issue is harmless here, so I am dropping it. good luck with page ownership. - üser:Altenmann >t 18:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]