Keep - The article was butchered in the past, instead of adding refs. even referenced pieces were deleted. Because it looked like "how-to". But there are quite a few encyclopedic issues lost, such as "purpose of dialogue" (in writing), which are readily found in books, e.g.,
here or
here, etc.. -
Altenmann>talk04:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. As it stands the information in this article is mainly trivial and obvious, but if it can be improved along the lines implied by
Altenmann then why not keep it? There are numerous points that are not discussed, of which here are two: in a longish dialogue between two people how often do readers need to be reminded which one applies to a given comment? There is no mention of punctuation.
Athel cb (
talk)
08:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - The article was butchered in the past, instead of adding refs. even referenced pieces were deleted. Because it looked like "how-to". But there are quite a few encyclopedic issues lost, such as "purpose of dialogue" (in writing), which are readily found in books, e.g.,
here or
here, etc.. -
Altenmann>talk04:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. As it stands the information in this article is mainly trivial and obvious, but if it can be improved along the lines implied by
Altenmann then why not keep it? There are numerous points that are not discussed, of which here are two: in a longish dialogue between two people how often do readers need to be reminded which one applies to a given comment? There is no mention of punctuation.
Athel cb (
talk)
08:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)reply