Talk:Epigrams
Scope of article
editShouldn't this article focus on quotes about epigrams, like the Aphorisms article, rather than examples of epigrams? ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- Should it? Last words is a collection of last words, not quotes about them. BD2412 T 21:59, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I think Last words is a little different. "Famous Last Words" is a subject of significant interest (leaving aside that many items in our article are not famous) because the particularity of the defining context, typically arising but once in a lifetime, may be seen as lending an inherent poignancy. There are some common threads in that real-world poignancy which, arguably, make for a coherent theme article. (Some tangentially related articles do not have the same real-world poignancy.)
Epigrams are defined in the article as statements that are "brief, interesting, and usually memorable". One might think virtually everything in Wikiquote ought to exemplify these characteristics. The article further describes them as sometimes surprising, which narrows it down very little. Not to pick on the inadequacies of an incomplete definition, an epigram may also be identified by one of two defining characteristics: (1) being a brief witticism, and/or (2) using a short poetic form for witty or pithy effect. Either one of these criteria identifies a broad range of material addressing an unlimited range of subjects. Together they encompass everything from one-line jokes to limericks.
My point is that I think this is an overly broad scope for a theme article. One could write, and some have written, entire volumes of epigrams. The scope is even broader than Proverbs which, at least nominally, share a certain common purport (but which, IMO, will eventually need to be split by subject). ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:55, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I think Last words is a little different. "Famous Last Words" is a subject of significant interest (leaving aside that many items in our article are not famous) because the particularity of the defining context, typically arising but once in a lifetime, may be seen as lending an inherent poignancy. There are some common threads in that real-world poignancy which, arguably, make for a coherent theme article. (Some tangentially related articles do not have the same real-world poignancy.)
- I agree that the article should be about Epigrams (just like the Proverbs article is about proverbs).
TheMost quotes by Martial (that are currently in this article) should simply be moved to his own page, methinks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC) last edit: 15:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)- At least a couple quotes of Martial (Book I, Epigram 110 and Book XI, Epigram 42) are sufficiently on-topic for a page of quotes about epigrams. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed, you're right. ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- I concede the point. A page of epigrams would be boundless and unwieldy. The quotes by Martial which are not about epigrams should be moved out. BD2412 T 15:39, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed, you're right. ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- At least a couple quotes of Martial (Book I, Epigram 110 and Book XI, Epigram 42) are sufficiently on-topic for a page of quotes about epigrams. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)