Talk:CliffsNotes

message: One thing that Cliff's Notes and Wikipedia have in common is that they pull their references from other sources and are widely criticized if used for direct citation.  I believe this is a topic of further discussion.
: Perhaps. But not here. - DavidWBrooks 00:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms 

message: This term (Cliff's Notes for X) has spread into a generic use meaning summary, more or less. I have never even seen a Cliff's Notes (or CliffsNotes) and I use the phrase this way. e.g. "Here's the Cliff's Notes version" (=="Here's a summary").
But in two minutes of googling, I can't find a decent linguistic reference in order to expand on this in the article. Grooh. If someone else can, please add it. pfctdayelise (translate?) 14:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More generic usage 

message: As there are myriad competitors to Cliff's Notes, placing a few of them in See Also is worthless. Who's ever heard of Bookrags or York Notes? Spark Notes is the modern-day Cliff's Notes, and is worthy of See Also. Otherwise we may as well link to Monarch Notes, Bloom's Notes, Barron's Notes, etc. etc. etc. --Metrofeed 13:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: York Notes are standard. Who in the UK has ever heard of 'CliffsNotes'? (Read: kill the American bias.) Njál 13:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  See Also 

message: There's no current mention in this article about why the title is "CliffsNotes", as opposed to "Cliffs Notes". There is a mention about it not being "CliffNotes", but there is no cited source for an authoritative declaration of this fact. The image currently shown in the article appears to be titled Cliffs Notes on Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, which implies "Cliffs Notes" is correct. A quick check of the Library of Congress shows many different issues in this product line with various spellings, spacing, and capitalization, including "Cliffsnotes" and possibly other variations. Such a basic question should have an answer with a properly referenced source. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "CliffsNotes" vs. "Cliffs Notes" 

message: Despite the inaccuracy, I'm fairly certain that I have heard people use "Cliff Notes" exclusively instead of "Cliffs Notes" when using the phrase to refer to a summary of material. (This is beside the fact that I've never heard anyone use the correct title when referring to actual Cliffs Notes themselves.) Perhaps I've had a different experience from others, but it seems like a bit of revision to history to say that people use the phrase "Cliffs Notes" just because that is the way they should have said "Cliff Notes". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.185.89  (talk • contribs) 15:39, 17 July 2007
::Cliff notes not "Cliffs notes" -- agreed Obamafan70 (talk) 22:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Cliff Notes" as a generic phrase

message: would it be worthwhile/wikipediec to have a complete list of the works for which cliffs notes exist here? - Shadowsill (talk) 03:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: we're not a product guide. the list would likely be massive. what you might do is create a category called "books for which there is a cliffsnotes version" and put all notable books on wikipedia in to it.--Crossmr (talk) 11:30, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete List 

message: Weren't Monarch Notes the grand-daddy of all of these types of study guides?  Why is there no article on them?  They were the study guide, bar none, not all that long ago (20 years or so) ... and they were quite a significant force.  Thanks.   (64.252.115.254 (talk) 23:56, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monarch Notes 

message: Who writes these Cliff's Notes? What's the company's process for creating these pamphlets? Do they contract with an English professor somewhere, or do they take submissions? These questions ought to be addressed in the article. 98.28.19.62 (talk) 06:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authorship 

message: I noticed that the article asks for citation, all of the information here can be found at the cliff's notes home page cliffsnotes.com  by simply looking for "history of cliff's notes"   The working link to said information is http://www.cliffsnotes.com/about-cliffsnotes/history-of-cliffsnotes.html   I am not up to date on how to cite references in wikipedia, but if one of you would like to for this article there it is.  Drkvamp (talk) 03:09, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed Obamafan70 (talk) 17:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation 

message: An IP user has raised a good question in an edit using the "when" tag (see article history): When was CliffsNotes formerly Cliffs Notes and when was Cliffsnotes originally Cliff's Notes?  I removed the "when" tag as it is clutter and frankly I have my doubts as to whether dates can be attributed to dating the use of Cliffs Notes and Cliff's Notes without using original research.  Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  When? 

message: no 2409:4071:DBF:C26C:0:0:6CC8:F012 (talk) 09:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  B.com3rd sem tempest