Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dialogue in writing

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. but this article needs to be improved. I hope some editors take it on as a project. If you believe content should be merge, please discuss it on the article talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dialogue in writing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

This article is basically a textbook entry providing tips on writing dialogue for fiction. I believe it violates Wikipedia's "Not a Textbook" guideline. [1]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bull Goose Loony (talk • contribs) 18:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – This is as valid a concept as any of the other articles listed at Dialogue (disambiguation).—Anita5192 (talk) 01:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:13, 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 >talk 04:58, 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]
• Strong keep I understand why the article might seem trivial, but I don’t see why it worth deletion. WP:SIGNIFICANT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vorann Gencov (talk • contribs) 15:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article was much better in 2007: Special:Permalink/124811521 but it was girdled by WP:V and WP:NOTHOWTO concerns. I also think User:Anita5192's new Dialogue in writing § Punctuation section might be a partial duplicate of English punctuation, and should be merged. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 12:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.