Difference between revisions of "Talk:ATD 81-96"
(about p95 interpretation) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Phrasing it that way leaves plenty of room for someone else to write a response of similar length, assuring that the wiki remains useful for all users.<br> | Phrasing it that way leaves plenty of room for someone else to write a response of similar length, assuring that the wiki remains useful for all users.<br> | ||
[[User:Ahpsp|Ahpsp]] 16:23, 29 November 2006 (PST) | [[User:Ahpsp|Ahpsp]] 16:23, 29 November 2006 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I totally agree, and I've mentioned that entries on the alpha index and the page-by-page should be brief, say no longer than 7-8 lines; if you want to go longer, be brief and create an article and a link to the article, natch... | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:WikiAdmin|WikiAdmin]] 16:34, 29 November 2006 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 16:34, 29 November 2006
==page 95 interpretation==
I think this interpretation is too long. The first part is reader response "this moved me" and the second paragraph is justification. The length makes it difficult to discuss without cluttering up the page. I would suggest a shortened version:
"This sentence raises the spectre of modern suicide bombers. Pynchon reminds us about the history of suicide bombers in America. (A citation to that would be nice.)"
Phrasing it that way leaves plenty of room for someone else to write a response of similar length, assuring that the wiki remains useful for all users.
Ahpsp 16:23, 29 November 2006 (PST)
I totally agree, and I've mentioned that entries on the alpha index and the page-by-page should be brief, say no longer than 7-8 lines; if you want to go longer, be brief and create an article and a link to the article, natch...
WikiAdmin 16:34, 29 November 2006 (PST)
