Talk:List of story structures

Should Narrative structure and Dramatic Structure be merged?

There's a lot of overlap between the two and often over time they borrowed from each other.--KimYunmi (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

People to come if people want to help with referencing

I'm adding Cicero, Lajos Egri, Xiqu (Chinese story format), Syd Field, Stephen King (said a few minor things in On Writing), and of course the women. I'm low on personal funds to buy/get the books in question though, so this might be a bit slower. Also, the people I'm listing I find personally frustrating since they don't cite previous works. With that, I'm also modulating slowly Freytag's contributions to what he actually contributed and not what they say he contributed in post. I'm also investigating John Ruskin and Mark Twain to see if they said anything about story structure. I'm struggling to find Regency writers about rhetoric and writing beyond what Lucy Worsley said in A Very British Romance. I might also modulate Frye by pointing out that the Bible had a given structure already (Hakawati), but I need better academic sources to back it.

BTW, I'm also taking the "Lacks inline citations" since I spent a lot of time adding them, connecting other articles, etc. And BTW, for Lit profs that object to Wikipedia articles, I 100% cited all of the pages on purpose so people who hear the traditional story about story structure could challenge them with the exact words. 'cause why not correct academia? --KimYunmi (talk) 19:03, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

The argument about v's in Latin

If it's what the text says and was copied from, then it stays. If it's a direct quote from Latin from a book, then it should stay as the direct quote from Latin. Changing it from a quoted text just so YOU feel more comfortable makes no sense. So should we also not put Chinese in traditional characters just to make non-Chinese speakers feel more comfortable? There are Latin scholars, and all of the text was copied one from one from the source material, as linked. Latin Scholars should be able to get past the "annoyance". Fidelity is more important than your convenience.--KimYunmi (talk) 00:31, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Again Fidelity is more important. If people want to find the text online, it will be spelled as such. When it's the title of the book and Google recognizes it as such, then we have to follow the Wikipedia rules about indexing. Google and also translate the Latin as such as well. Your own convenience does not trump Wikipedia rules nor the ability to search for and verify texts on google. Doesn't work that way.--KimYunmi (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To restructure the pages in an initiative led by KimYunmi using WP:BRD. Klbrain (talk) 08:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

---

I'm proposing a merger with Narrative structure, but moving everything to "Story Structure" for the following reasons:

1. Often the two overlap, such that the histories are similar and interweave. There is not often a difference between plays and movies and that of the spoken and written word.

2. In some cultures, "narrative" is not where the structure of the story is located. For example, Australia's aboriginal peoples, it is located with tone, which is a different element. Explaining this in either article would be difficult and hard to justify why it belongs there. The Narrative Structure Article is also really short.

3. There is barely anything on narrative structure, as an article, and much of the contents of that article would benefit from being with the Dramatic Structure material.

4. Both articles are a resource to outlink story structures that exist within wikipedia proper, so would also integrate well.

5. The redirects on both articles can work and be justified with a new Introduction mentioning how and why they often overlap.

I'm also thinking of splitting the article into time periods for Europe. Since after the 19th century, there is a split between the Structuralists and the Modernists, but it is currently difficult to delineate because they are mixed together and there are a lot of people to cover. But I suppose this is a separate issue. However, by adding the material from the Narrative structure article, it would be easier to show this split and separation. --KimYunmi (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It looks like currently, this is not an article on the concept of "narrative/dramatic structure", but rather an extensive list of examples of such structures. Renaming this to List of narrative structures might be more helpful. The other article also has this problem to some degree, so it might be a bit of work to reformat that and move text around. This would be my suggestion, at least. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 20:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I ended up boldly moving this article to "list" because this discussion never fully took off. @KimYunmi:, you can definitely make bold changes to these articles as well, I think. Separate articles on more specific traditions would be very much appreciated, but I'm hoping this current page can serve as a hub for expansion in lieu of better sourcing. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:43, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm debating a restructure, but having issues figuring out how to restructure it with the proposed merger.

I added the majority of the contents of this article/list, but I kind of thing that some of the personages should be merged into a history of the Three act/Five act to keep it neat, but it's hard to figure out how to do that. I'm also trying to finish the research on the 3/5 act structure. They have pretty much the same history, but diverge and come back together in ways that make it hard to write an article.

But this and Narrative structure should merge into one article. I'm still trying to figure out how to do all three objectives smoothly. ^^ Kinda looking for a sounding board, but I'm rapidly figuring out that most people don't have the info I do, so can't help to figure out how to move things here and there. So it's all floaty in my head, but not quite sure how to sort it for over a year.

Not sure if this will stay a list or not after that. KimYunmi (talk) 00:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid I definitely don't have much to work with myself, and such projects would indeed be a lot of work. I hope you can get something to work here, I would be very impressed. What I did was merely a hastily applied bandaid. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Noting that this seems to have been mostly completed in July 2023. Klbrain (talk) 08:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Denouements

Denouements points to this article, but I can't see the relationship to the topic being explained anywhere, with the redirected term in bold... thanks. 92.4.168.91 (talk) 20:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Try reading the paragraph it points to and the beginning of the section.—Anita5192 (talk) 02:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Do a find. Your device should have a find. There are 12 instances of it in the European and European Diaspora section. Technically dénouement was designated only for the "falling action" but later got recategorized to the conclusion, which goes against the intention of all of the previous creators. (likely happened in the 1980's, but I'm still trying to find the source that screwed it all up.).--KimYunmi (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)