Talk:Hypotext
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hypotext article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Untitled
This page is a double redirect (Hypotext → Hypertextuality → Hypertext), please retarget to Hypertext. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:49, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Done, thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Article rather than redirect
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This redirect is a bad idea. Hypotext merits a brief article e.g.
Gérard Genette defines "hypotext" as follows "Hypertextuality refers to any relationship uniting a text B (which I shall call the hypertext) to an earlier text A (I shall, of course, call it the hypotext), upon which it is grafted in a manner that is not that of commentary."
So, a hypertext derives from hypotext(s) through a process which Genette calls transformation, in which text B "evokes" text A without necessarily mentioning it directly.
Genette, Gérard. (1982). Palimpsestes. Seuil.
Not done: Your request is complicated by the existence of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hypotext; the concerns raised in that discussion need to be addressed before we can unprotect the redirect. I suggest creating a new article draft at WP:AFC and then requesting unprotection at WP:RFPP. The draft should show, through citations to reliable sources, that the term is not a neologism. I also recommend that you read WP:NEO to see how we usually define neologisms on Wikipedia. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:30, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks - much appreciated. It's not so much that it's a very important term, but that having it as a redirect to Hypertext is more misleading than having no article at all. It is a technical term in a specific field and has been in use for 30 years.
I think I've done what you suggested at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hypotext (Literature) and it's waiting for review. I changed the name because I wasn't sure what it meant about creating a redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.18.81.147 (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Hypotext not in Webster's 1985
This word is not in any of my dictionaries. It appears to be a wag the dog style attempt to cover the space of hypertext whose paternity is so oddly in dispute.
I coined "hypotext" to mean text purporting that the (www) was not invented before 87. Referring to cult that has sprung up in-wiki over the "no inventor" theory of the internet. I left a good reference on the hypertext page that makes that rather clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.230.184 (talk) 22:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi there. If you think the article doesn't belong, then you are welcome to nominate it at articles for deletion after your block expires. Being in the dictionary or not doesn't matter so much, though - the tests we use are the general notability guideline, and in this case, the policy on neologisms. It's pretty clear from the references that hypotext is a well-known concept in semiotics, though, so I don't think a deletion discussion would be successful. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC)