Talk:Characterisation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Financial Characterization 2 Literary Characterization 3 Merge proposal 4 Dubious edits 5 Merge and spelling

[edit] Financial Characterization

Characterization is also a tax term. Where is the article about it? 209.244.43.13 (talk) 17:39, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Where you put it :-) Start at Characterization (disambiguation). — TowerDragon (talk) 23:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Literary Characterization

"For example, Leo Tolstoy's novels are widely regarded as having created complex believable characters." Can we get a source on this? Sounds awfully passive and unattributed. I left it in, but I don't think it's useful as it is. Mariko

May be best to delete the whole page?, as Fictional character covers it more thoroughly.Andycjp19th June 2004

Would a disambiguation page be useful here? There are now a total of 4 different uses of characterization listed. Alan Joe Skarda 15:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................./?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/

[edit] Merge proposal

I'm not sure that the merge proposal is such a good idea. Certainly, the two articles could do with some editing in light of each other, but characterization is a distinct process from the analysis of character, and offers the potential for substantial further development. DionysosProteus 16:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the above. I searched for this page specifically to be enlighted on the process of characterisation.

[User:djknight82]] 15:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with the idea of merging the topics. Characters move stories. No characters, no stories. Great characters, great stories. The discipline of creating characters, characterization, is an honored skill among writers. In teaching characterization, I start with Arthur and the Sword in the Stone. Joseph Campbell told me that this story is deeply psychological and that the play of the characters in the mind determine the nature of the individual. I believe he said that it might have been an early method of psychoanalysis. In any case, it gets people cracking on developing complex characters with a lot of power. Dreamdissolve (talk) 03:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Another agreement with the above. Link the articles together however you wish, but characterization really should have independent treatment, and I think that is best done in an article where it stands as its own headword. -- Beckersc0t 14:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Characterisation is the process of designing a character and as such is seperate and distinct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.105.17.26 (talk) 11:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious edits

--76.175.139.34 (talk) 02:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)It seems some parts of the original "Characterization" page got lost while fighting vandalism:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Characterization&diff=next&oldid=178720683 — "Character development" section deleted
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Characterization&diff=next&oldid=210723322 — "See also" section deleted
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Characterization&diff=next&oldid=216990664 — "Direct vs. indirect characterization" section deleted

Some more points of interest:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Characterization&diff=next&oldid=198592176 Repairing link to disambiguation page — Got "explicit" wrong, should link to Implicature would be a better candidate, but still not quite correct
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Characterization&diff=next&oldid=199239839 — Shows two versions of a more elaborate lead text

— TowerDragon (talk) 09:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC), TowerDragon (talk) 20:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I restored the three deleted sections (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Characterisation&diff=next&oldid=230982073).

— TowerDragon (talk) 20:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

… again (sigh). If only people could take a bit more time to check if not only one but perhaps the two last edits were actually vandalism…

— TowerDragon (talk) 23:54, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Merge and spelling

I've just undone the recent move from -s to -z spelling, since Wikipedia policy says it should stay where it was. In line with that, I've updated the spelling throughout to reflect the article title. I've also removed the MERGE proposal, as it is clear that the majority disagree with the proposal. DionysosProteus (talk) 11:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)