Talk:Literary merit

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Literary merit redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Philosophy: Aesthetics Mid‑importance

This redirect 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.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Aesthetics

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

(old)[edit]

what is a literary merits?

I wouldn't consider The Da Vinci Code to be the best example of something that doesn't have literary merit because its not very clear why. I am assuming it' more of a butt hurt thing for the Christians than anything else. Considering most people would have seen the movie but not read the book they wouldn't understand why it can not be considered for literary merit, even worse if they've only seen the south park episode they would assume it was for the fact that The Da Vinci Code is a fictional work.

-Start

5/24/2010

The Da Vinci Code does have at least some arguable amount of literary merit. A common characteristic of literary merit (at least in fiction) seems to be some kind of deep-level character development, usually in some way that propagates the overall plot. An example of this characteristic is obvious in Huckleberry Finn's epiphany in the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain.

Relative to this, the book Twlight by Stephanie Meyer does not have any considerable amount of literary merit since the overall plot is loosely defined and there is little to no actual character or plot development (more-like a series of loosely related events that eventually lead to a vague climax).

This is subjective, yes?

-End

Fiction only[edit]

Is it true that literary merit pertains only to fiction?
--as we say in the lead sentence, linking the same article. --P64 (talk) 20:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Existence[edit]

Does this page really need to exist? It offers nothing. 79.70.184.163 (talk) 12:54, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this can be merged with Western canon"? Rwood128 (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality[edit]

Since my deletion request was denied without any changes being made, I've gone through the article and removed anything that was poorly written, or that resembled original research or synthesis. There was very little there to start with, and now there's even less. I can't imagine how an encyclopedia page could ever possibly cover an issue like this, but since it isn't going to be deleted, it needs an absolutely massive amount of improvement. 79.70.188.34 (talk) 14:36, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

Unless there are objections I will merge the articles.Rwood128 (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge completed. Rwood128 (talk) 14:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]