Talk:Crime fiction/Catalogs: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:12, 9 January 2010

How should the entries of the catalogs be arranged?

For Famous books I would suggest to list: Year it was first published - Title - Author (ordered by the year).
For Famous detectives it is more difficult. Simply by last name? Or classify them first by "type" (private detective, amateur, ...)? Or geographical (Maigret in Paris, ...)? Or by time period? Or a combination of these? In any case, I think the author should be added.
For the Prominent writers the alphabetical order is best, of course. But the format might need a change. (Perhaps year of birth should be added, too?). Concerning the title: Is "prominent" a good choice? (Will all entries be prominent?)

--Peter Schmitt 10:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-#REDIRECT [[Talk:Crime fiction/Catalogs/Prominent writers]]
+== Format of catalogs ==
+How should the entries of the catalogs be arranged?
+* For [[Crime fiction/Catalogs/Famous books|Famous books]] I would suggest to list: Year it was first published - Title - Author (ordered by the year).
+* For [[Crime fiction/Catalogs/Famous detectives|Famous detectives]] it is more difficult. Simply by last name? Or classify them first by "type" (private detective, amateur, ...)? Or geographical (Maigret in Paris, ...)? Or by time period? Or a combination of these? In any case, I think the author should be added.
+* For the [[Crime fiction/Catalogs/Prominent writers|Prominent writers]] the alphabetical order is best, of course. But the format might need a change. (Perhaps year of birth should be added, too?). Concerning the title: Is "prominent" a good choice? (Will all entries be prominent?)
+--[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 10:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)