Template talk:Arts criticism navigation

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Arts This template is within the scope of WikiProject Arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Philosophy: Aesthetics This template is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia. Associated task forces: /  Aesthetics

Hello: in defence of the template and the articles

OK, I feel there's some risk here that this template and, indeed, some of the articles I have created for it might come in for a hard time. For that reason I wish to state what my intention was and is in creating the template and the articles.

Firstly, I feel that all the criticism articles have a place in Wikipedia. Critics of all art forms have tremendous power through their ability to bring works to a wider audience and, indeed, to diminish that audience by giving it a poor review.

I feel each article can be fleshed out with the following:

• An exploration of the sorts of questions critics ask themselves when viewing a work (eg, what does a film critic look for that is common to all films he views? What does a fiction reviewer look for when reading a novel?... these will necessarily be quite basic in order to cover as broad a range within each field as possible).
• Some coverage of highly noted critics.
• Mention of particularly notable books and periodicals in the field of criticism discussed.
• Some external links where the reader can find examples of criticism.

There may be much more that can be added but that sounds like a good start to me.

As for the NavBox: I feel all of the articles make good bedfellows: many national newspapers will group those fields together when you navigate to their 'arts' portal and this seems to me a perfectly reasonable thing for them to have done. I contend that it is perfectly reasonable for us to do so too.

Thanks for listening --bodnotbod (talk) 20:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]