Talk:Swedish literature
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Swedish literature has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
The article on Swedish literature is supported by WikiProject Sweden, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. |
|---|---|
 GA |
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Norwegian literature
Lots of improvement going on now at Norwegian literature, we might want to schedule this article for some upgrading too and maybe get a template. We also might want to create a Scandinavian literature article to keep track of all this stuff :) Haukur 22:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Scandinavian literature has begun. Come on over and help out... Williamborg 02:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Okay :) Haukur 21:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Todo
Needs more mention:
Fred-Chess 09:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removed
I have today removed one section about Latin works , and one section about spiritual literature in the 18th century, since these weren't Swedish language literature. Fred-Chess 21:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Some comments
I saw that you requested a review of this article, so I read it through and gave it a copyedit, running an English eye over it (feel free to revert me where you disagree).
Apart from Strindberg, I knew little about the subject matter, and so I read the article with great interest. It is certainly very full; in terms of content and referencing it obviously represents very thorough work, and on those grounds it has the makings of a quality article. Where it falls down, perhaps inevitably, is in the prose, which is a little stiff and unidiomatic, in my opinion. I've copyedited some individual words and phrases, though I couldn't quite work out what was meant by:
- enlived
- naturesque
- transisted
so I left them alone. I also found the following a little inscrutable
- The 20th century in literature cannot be said to have begun in the 1900. In fact, the poets of the 90s had their strongest support in the early 1900s.
I took this to mean that the 20th century in literature didn't really begin until after the first decade of the century, but I wasn't sure, and so I left it alone.
Although I've corrected some individual words, there are longer passages that don't read as clearly and fluently as they could, in my opinion. I'm always willing to help, though you may feel I've already interfered too much.
But, once again, this is a substantial and informative article of good quality. Many congratulations.
(By the way, though I don't really know anything about Swedish literature, I have read a quite brilliant book by Tove Jansson (Finnish, but a Swedish writer) called "The Summer Book", one of her adult books. It made an impact in Britain when it was translated into English a few years ago. Here's a review of it: Lights on a String)
All the best. qp10qp 01:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you indeed.
- With English level 3, this is the best I can write, and I'm not ashamed to admit that copyediting of my articles is usually necessary...
- I'll address your questions shortly.
- Fred-Chess 06:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, a good article in the making. Lots of content, thoroughly sourced. This is exactly the kind of article Wikipedia needs. It's just that the English needs severe reworking. I'll try and do some copy-editing on it over the next few days. Cheers. --Folantin 19:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA
Hello, in my assessment, this meets the required criteria. One suggestion, merge or expand the short paragraphs. I would also recommend expanding any of the "main article" sections, with regard to each sub-subject's influence on Swedish literature as a whole. The Rök Runestone is especially interesting to me, but the coverage through out history is pretty good! =b d= DVD+ R/W 21:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Questions, again.
I'm confused by the first paragraph of the "16th and 17th century" section. It states that Swedish Reformation literature is "generally considered a step back culturally." I'm not certain what is being stepped back from. The law texts? The Swedish chronicles, not mentioned in this article but in its subarticle, "Early Swedish literature"? The character of Swedish literature during this time isn't made very clear, so I'm not really certain what's being compared. Was this poetry? Stage drama? History? Theology? Are the literary qualities of various types of law-texts being compared? Sorry to bother you all like this, but I'm still somewhat muddle-headed about these affairs after reading these associated articles. Thanks for your time, and good luck with the article. Geuiwogbil 03:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't mind at, I think it is fun. Keep in mind that I have written the bulk of this page so further work is likely necessary to establish complete NPOV. I think I have clarified the issue. / Fred-Chess 09:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thank you very much! I get it now. Geuiwogbil 13:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't quite get what the following sentence means: "With the advent of social democracy and large-scale strikes, the new winds were blowing in the direction of a working class reformation." It's the phrase "working class reformation" that puzzles me.
Also, shouldn't Gunnar Ekelöf get a mention in this article? He's one of only three Swedish poets I've ever heard of (the others are Bellman and Tranströmer). --Folantin 09:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't realize he was that well-known. Sure, I'll mention him. Thanks for the feedback. / Fred-Chess 17:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA review
A Good Article review has been opened concerning this page's status, with a multitude of concerns given, at WP:GA/R. Any involved editors might be helpful for the discussion. Homestarmy 21:59, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] W is missing
The picture which is said to contain the swedish alphabet suffers from the lack of the W letter. W is nowadays considered as a part of the swedish alphabet, and not as before just a variant of V. So please try to correct this.
