Talk:Metzengerstein

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Metzengerstein article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Short story task force. (with unknown importance)
	This article is supported by the 19th century task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Footnotes

When adding editorial commentary (such as edition information), in professional publications it would be relegated to a footnote. It is jarring to be reading a summary of the plot, then transition to an editorial comment, without any markers of transition (a simple parenthesis is not clear). It is also poorly worded as it stands, it took a couple double takes to figure out what was trying to be done there. 71.191.42.242 (talk) 15:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I disagree that it's written poorly, and I disagree that the "editorial comment" must be a footnote as I've seen it elsewhere in high quality articles on Wikipedia. Also, if you'd just take a moment and look, that particular footnote that you added is used three times in the article. You'd have to do some serious work to convince me that The young baron says, "It is a path I have prayed to follow. I would wish all I love to perish of that gentle disease." is referring to age 18 .. the age is not consistent in later re-publications of the story. I'm reverting again. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Well that's easily fixed make it a separate note with a reference to the source in standard author, date format. But I have no interest in fighting over something so trivial. If you disagree, than you win, pretty simple. Again, keep up the good work on the Poe articles, I'll move on. 71.191.42.242 (talk) 14:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't mean to start a fight - and I definitely don't mean to put you off from assisting in approving this article and others. I'm sorry if I came across too strong, I'm just wearing my hat as the defender of the Poe on wiki! :) Thanks for improving the plot summary here. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)