Talk:List of story structures

message: There's a lot of overlap between the two and often over time they borrowed from each other.--KimYunmi (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Should [[Narrative structure]] and [[Dramatic Structure]] be merged?

message: I'm adding Cicero, Lajos Egri, Xiqu (Chinese story format), Syd Field, Stephen King (said a few minor things in On Writing), and of course the women. I'm low on personal funds to buy/get the books in question though, so this might be a bit slower. Also, the people I'm listing I find personally frustrating since they don't cite previous works. With that, I'm also modulating slowly Freytag's contributions to what he actually contributed and not what they say he contributed in post. I'm also investigating John Ruskin and Mark Twain to see if they said anything about story structure. I'm struggling to find Regency writers about rhetoric and writing beyond what Lucy Worsley said in A Very British Romance. I might also modulate Frye by pointing out that the Bible had a given structure already (Hakawati), but I need better academic sources to back it.
BTW, I'm also taking the "Lacks inline citations" since I spent a lot of time adding them, connecting other articles, etc. And BTW, for Lit profs that object to Wikipedia articles, I 100% cited all of the pages on purpose so people who hear the traditional story about story structure could challenge them with the exact words. 'cause why not correct academia? --KimYunmi (talk) 19:03, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: People to come if people want to help with referencing

message: If it's what the text says and was copied from, then it stays. If it's a direct quote from Latin from a book, then it should stay as the direct quote from Latin. Changing it from a quoted text just so YOU feel more comfortable makes no sense. So should we also not put Chinese in traditional characters just to make non-Chinese speakers feel more comfortable? There are Latin scholars, and all of the text was copied one from one from the source material, as linked. Latin Scholars should be able to get past the "annoyance". Fidelity is more important than your convenience.--KimYunmi (talk) 00:31, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Again Fidelity is more important. If people want to find the text online, it will be spelled as such. When it's the title of the book and Google recognizes it as such, then we have to follow the Wikipedia rules about indexing. Google and also translate the Latin as such as well. Your own convenience does not trump Wikipedia rules nor the ability to search for and verify texts on google. Doesn't work that way.--KimYunmi (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: The argument about v's in Latin

message: Denouements points to this article, but I can't see the relationship to the topic being explained anywhere, with the redirected term in bold... thanks. 92.4.168.91 (talk) 20:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Try reading the paragraph it points to and the beginning of the section.—Anita5192 (talk) 02:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Do a find. Your device should have a find. There are 12 instances of it in the European and European Diaspora section. Technically dénouement was designated only for the "falling action" but later got recategorized to the conclusion, which goes against the intention of all of the previous creators. (likely happened in the 1980's, but I'm still trying to find the source that screwed it all up.).--KimYunmi (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denouements