Talk:Still waters run deep

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's 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.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved the main article, and after looking it over, moved the disambiguation page, too. (For the record, though, "I haven't bothered to check" is perhaps not the most compelling argument to support one's position.) (non-admin closure) Red Slash 01:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

– "Still waters run deep", the proverb, is the origin of the phrase, and is far and away the most scholarly article (and per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term". And IMO is probably sought than the other four uses (1916 film, 1970 album, 1987 song, 2002 song) put together, although I haven't bothered to check. Move. Herostratus (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - the capitalization misleading suggests a written work. If dab is needed still waters run deep (proverb) would be better, but since this is primary, support the move. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:20, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the original writer of the article. I don't agree with the proposal above to reduce capitalisation. It seems to have been made without reading the article, where it is clear that written works are involved. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 12:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was based on the lede, which doesn't use capitalization. The lede begins "Still waters run deep is a proverb...", and the article is about the proverb rather than any particular work or works title "Still Waters Run Deep". To the extent that actual titled works are involved, "A Country-man and a River" and "Le torrent et la rivière" ("The Torrent and the River", I think) and as "De rustico amnem transituro" ("The Farmer Crosses the River", more or less) seem to the be the ones in play. Herostratus (talk) 14:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the disambig page move. Nom says he hasn't bothered to check on the primarytopic criteria. Dicklyon (talk) 19:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think the nom has demonstrated that the primary topic criteria are satisfied. Agree also with the non-capitalisation. Can argue the DAB move both ways, but on balance I think move it too as proposed... disambiguation purely by punctuation or capitalisation is not adequate when one of the pages is itself a DAB, in my opinion. Andrewa (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Odd choice of Shakespeare quote

Why use the current Shakespeare quote - which has nothing to do with water - rather than the more obvious:

Smooth runs the water where the brook is deep,
And in his simple show he harbors treason.

William M. Connolley (talk) 06:41, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]