Talk:Dongba script

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Writing systems		Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WP Writing systemsWriting system articles
Writing portal v • d • e This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.  ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.  ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is currently or was the subject of an 2008 fall semester educational assignment. Further details are available here.

[edit] Wikipedia assignment collaboration

The paragraphs you added provide good information, but it might help to edit a little since there are various typing mistakes. It might also help to attempt to integrate your paragraphs with the rest since there seems to be a few repetition of information and awkward starts. Jcc349 (talk) 19:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice work, Luna! You really filled out the article well. Your list of references at the end is good, but I think it might be a good idea to cite in-text as well, showing which information you got from which source. A few minor typos:

• There is an extra line between the second and third paragraph of the "origin and development" section.
• In the first paragraph of "origin and dev.", second sentence, you wrote "...the Dongba script was created the founder..." I think you meant to say "by the founder".
• In the "Usage" section, the first sentence of the first paragraph should be split into two sentences.
• In "Structure and Form", second paragraph, second sentence, last word "meanningful" is spelled wrong.
• Here and there a period at the end of a sentence doesn't have a space after it.

Overall, it looks great! --zcat13 (talk) 21:54, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not logographic, it's pictographic, and is nothing like Chinese. And they're not hieroglyphs either. kwami (talk) 00:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey Luna,

The structure of the wikipage is nicely done. It's clear and well organized. I'm not sure how much you took from what source, but I think it would be nice to cite all your sources more frequently when you use them.

I also noticed that you mentioned that Naxi was pictographic and ideographic twice and I was wondering if you could just clarify what you mean by each in either one of the two cases (i.e. maybe give a short definition and what specifically about the Naxi scripts makes it pictographic and ideographic)

That's all, overall it looks very well done. --Lululululu12 (talk) 03:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I've added in-text citations and made a few other minor changes. I've also added in a chart! Lunabunny (talk)