This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|living=no|listas=Booth, Wayne|1=
A comprehensive list of Wayne Clayson Booth writings (both books and articles) with links to academic locations via WorldCat is available at The Library of Rhetoric - Wayne C. Booth. The reason I have submitted this for discussion is because I am the Content Librarian for the Library of Rhetoric and do not want this link to be perceived as self-promotion. If there are any objections or if someone else would be willing to add the link to the main page without my doing so, please let me know. In the event that no one comments or has an objection, I will go ahead and post this as a resource link on Friday, May 13, 2011. ( MercyBreeze ( talk) 00:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC))
This paragraph is somewhat incoherent, but without having read the book it summarizes, I'm not sure how to fix it. Maybe:
Does that accurately represent Booth's argument? -- Jim Henry ( talk) 00:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|living=no|listas=Booth, Wayne|1=
A comprehensive list of Wayne Clayson Booth writings (both books and articles) with links to academic locations via WorldCat is available at The Library of Rhetoric - Wayne C. Booth. The reason I have submitted this for discussion is because I am the Content Librarian for the Library of Rhetoric and do not want this link to be perceived as self-promotion. If there are any objections or if someone else would be willing to add the link to the main page without my doing so, please let me know. In the event that no one comments or has an objection, I will go ahead and post this as a resource link on Friday, May 13, 2011. ( MercyBreeze ( talk) 00:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC))
This paragraph is somewhat incoherent, but without having read the book it summarizes, I'm not sure how to fix it. Maybe:
Does that accurately represent Booth's argument? -- Jim Henry ( talk) 00:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)