Jump to content

Template talk:Narrative

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconLiterature Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fiction writingTemplate:Narrative — Elements of this template like character, plot, setting, theme, tense, etc. don't just apply to fictional works, but other forms of narrative as well. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose- What is this, the year of renaming everything narrative? No. People are more fammiliar with the term "fiction" than "narrative". --WikiDonn (talk) 19:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fiction does not mean the same thing as narrative. Narrative is how to tell a story, which in the case of this template may also refer to a non-fiction piece. "First person" or "present tense," each of which are linked on this template, aren't just part of "fiction" writing. I hope that whoever reviews this move request understands the distinction. -- Wikipedical (talk) 02:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Narrative means story, literature or book, but most of the terms in the template are associated with fictional writing. If the current title is really too specific for you, how about something with "story", "literature" or "book" in it? Those terms are much more widely used. --WikiDonn (talk) 04:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, if you read what's in the template, it is not about "books." Protagonists, conflict, exposition, suspension of disbelief: those are all terms that very much have to do with plays, movies, and other media. Thus, I would also scratch off "literature," as, again, films/TV deal with characters, setting, plot, and other elements on the template. So if it comes down to "story" vs. "narrative," I don't see what your reluctance with narrative is. Narrative is not an obscure term. Wikipedia uses it over "story" to describe elements of storytelling. See Plot (narrative), Narrative structure, Climax (narrative), Narrative mode, etc. Heck, look at Narrative and Story, and you can see which is more fleshed out. I would recommend taking it up with WP:WAF if you have a problem with the word choice. In fact, if you really feel strongly about this, I would let the move request pass and then submit your own move request from Template:Narrative to Template:Story. However, in the meantime: the template is called "Fiction writing" and will stay that way with your "oppose" vote. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't have to be that way. There are many move requests that end with it being changed to something other than the suggested name if everybody agrees to it. Judging the length of your post, you feel more strongly about this than I do. However if we both agree on "Story" or "Storytelling" it can still be changed to that from this move request. Sorry, but I would say that narrative is an obscure term, as Wikipedia is the only place that I have seen the term narrative used as meaning something other than "a story that is narrated" (and therefore other people are likely to think it means that too), but that is just my opinion. Just wait and see what other people have to say about it. --WikiDonn (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you're saying, but as it stands your "oppose" vote still asserts that this template should remain "Template:Fiction writing," which I hope you see is wrong. -- Wikipedical (talk) 02:58, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The template is obviously about narrative in general and not just the written form. Fences&Windows 15:14, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support New name seems more accurate. I don't see the drawbacks. Propaniac (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Omniscient Narrator[edit]

The links entitled 'Omniscient' and 'Omniscient Narrator' both lead to the same place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit the template[edit]

Regarding the recent move of this template, it should have Fiction writing added to it, and its "view/discuss/edit" links changed so they're not redirects. B7T (talk) 11:27, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added Third person[edit]

Hello Just noting that I've added a link to the third person narrative to the template, as for some reason it was missing — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:28, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Add Free indirect speech to this template?[edit]

Why is the article on Free indirect speech not included in this template? It seems appropriate to the Narrative line of articles. I posted this question at that article's talk page as well, Free indirect speech. The device is attributed to Jane Austen, and used by other authors since her time of writing.

The link to that post is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Free_indirect_speech#Add_this_to_the_Narrative_template.3F

No replies to that yet. --Prairieplant (talk) 07:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed category: Collection[edit]

I propose the insertion of a new category, initially:

Collection: Anthology, Book series, Parallel novel, Prequel, Sequel, Trilogy

I would like to hear what other editors think about whether such a category is appropriate in this template.—Anita5192 (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]