Talk:Book
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Book article. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||
| Archives: Index, 1 | |||
|
|
|||
| Book has been listed as a level-2 vital article in Language. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class. |
| WikiProject Books | (Rated C-class) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||
| WikiProject Education | (Rated C-class, Top-importance) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 / Vital / Supplemental | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 30 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
Contents |
First paragraph sounds peculiar
"A book is a lame stupid thing that teachers make kids read. A book is for bootylickers. set " seems to me a very personal and not largely agreed upon opinion. Please, reconsider. 80.181.101.227 (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2011 (UTC)Mariella
What is a fascicle?
I followed a link to fascicle (book), which redirects here. Currently, this isn't at all helpful. Is anyone able to add some information about fascicles to the article? Thanks, Jowa fan (talk) 13:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC) ETA: OK, I just found the page Fascicle. Perhaps Fascicle (book) ought to redirect there? Jowa fan (talk) 13:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I've now changed Fascicle (book) to redirect to Fascicle. Jowa fan (talk) 02:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from Deasington, 30 June 2011
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section on Thumb Indents the words "table of context" should be changed to "table of contents" - the word context has been mistakenly inserted instead of contents...
Deasington (talk) 15:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Error in the Wood Block Printing section
(emphasis mine)
This method originated in China, in the Han dynasty (before 220AD), as a method of printing on textiles and later paper, and was widely used throughout East Asia. The oldest dated book printed by this method is The Diamond Sutra (868 AD).
The method (called Woodcut when used in art) arrived in China in the early 14th century.
Clearly something is amiss in the second paragraph. China cannot invent woodblock printing technology and then receive it 1200 years later... The Masked Booby (talk) 04:52, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
First line of first paragraph.
"A book is a book"
Is this a joke? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Καλλίμαχος (talk • contribs) 03:09, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- It was this edit that introduced that particular turn of phrase, which was a contender for "Sentence of the Week" on The 6th Floor NYT blog. Gobonobo T C 15:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Possible weird vandalism
Was stunned to see links to "Topic" and many "Support" links that have nothing to do with the article about books. RandMC (talk) 03:13, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- Could you be more specific? Which links exactly? --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Blatant Vandalism
In the Antiquity section,
"When The Internet was invented in Ancient Greece, nearly everything that could be written upon—grass, rocks, tree bark, metal sheets"...
and the Internet Link points to Never Gonna Give you up wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crastephanie (talk • contribs) 15:52, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
- It has been reverted now. Feel free to do so yourself next time. --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Purpose
The purpose of books only seems to be mentioned way down the page, almost like an afterthought. Surely it's rather a significant aspect of them? I suggest adding a line such as "books are a text-based medium of communication" somewhere in the first paragraph. Danja (talk) 08:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- It would be a good idea to mention something about what they are used for, but remember not all books are exclusively text based, some are illustrated, some even haven't got any text at all. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
book vs e-book
Currently the first paragraph reads:
A book is a set of written, printed, illustrated, or blank sheets, made of ink, paper, parchment, or other materials, usually fastened together to hinge at one side. A single sheet within a book is called a leaf, and each side of a leaf is called a page. A book produced in electronic format is known as an electronic book (e-book).
The last sentence quite contradicts the rest of the paragraph and should be removed from that paragraph. An 'e-book' is not the same as a 'book', as it is not physical, and does not contain any ink, and is not bound. Whether or not 'e-book' is left in the article I have less of an opinion on. 41.204.77.224 (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
i need to find info on emily costello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.124.75.206 (talk) 23:16, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- I have changed the electronic book line to "A set of text-filled or illustrated pages produced in electronic format is known as an electronic book (e-book)." Does this adequately address your observation? JoBaWik (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
reduced section
I culled the section bloat under "Book Manufacturing in the modern world" - now "Book manufacture in modern times" but want to say the former detailed information would really suit a wiki text book on the processes, measurements etc. It's too much for an encyc article, but a text book would be good. Just sayin' Manytexts (talk) 08:13, 21 April 2013 (UTC)











