Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/DNB Epitome 63

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

has this been checked for order and completeness against the original DNB> Dsp13 (talk) 12:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I see not - though it's now hand-checked against the concise DNB for order & completeness! Dsp13 (talk) 14:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's a question: how shld we handle cases like the DNB's alphbetical entry for Dorothy Wordsworth (which pointed the user to the DNB's preferred name form Dorothy Quillinan)? Dsp13 (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
a variant of this: the DNB entry 'WORTLEY, STUART-. [See STUART-WORTLEY]' ! Dsp13 (talk) 12:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
and cases like John Worlidge, where both the concise DNB and the vol 63 have name variants John Worlidge and John Woolridge ?Dsp13 (talk) 12:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
and the case of Sir Henry Wroth, included in DNB 63 p163 as subidiary (with name capitalized but not bolded) of Sir Robert Wroth. (Given his own entry in the 1935 ed of the Concise DNB which I have, although interestingly missing from the list on this page - missing from MM's list?)Dsp13 (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Oooh, how about one question at a time? My intention is really to have a main list that corresponds exactly to the DNB article order. We should correspond closely to what Wikisource does, or it will be too confusing. s:Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Vol 63 Wordsworth - Zuylestein isn't started at all. You can see their style at s:Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Vol 1 Abbadie - Anne, where there is some non-linked text in place in the list for non-article headings (types of redirect). My suggestion is that we indent those on the bulleted list, for now.
As for the subarticles thing, it is an endemic problem for 'merging': the WP natural scope of an article may not coincide with the scope in the merged source. So, I believe the right thing is to add a comment on the scope, when the list becomes a table rather than bulleted. (I.e. there is a need for scope comments.) By the way, you'd be interested in one case - Gideon Harvey who was the first person to use the word "ontology" in English, where the DNB article has a subarticle on Gideon Harvey the younger. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)