Talk:Back-story

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Back-story article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Contents 1 Old Testament 2 Alwaysabackstory.com 3 Example section - original research? 4 Added a small section on sustainability backstories 5 Move?

[edit] Old Testament

Many Christian theologians consider the Old Testament to be the back story for the New Testament. - isn't that a stretch of the meaning of the term? Considering that the OT was written, and published, before the NT, it doesn't seem to fit the definition of "back story" Nik42 08:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Nik42 and have removed the section on the Old Testament. It seems to stretch the definition of 'back-story' quite a bit. Tocharianne 14:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alwaysabackstory.com

Removed the external link to www.alwaysabackstory.com. This is just a website where people upload pictures and others invent backstories for them. It is not relevant to the usual literary use of backstory. Tocharianne 23:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Example section - original research?

The whole "Examples" sections seems like original research to me. It's full of speculation and weasels words like "arguably", along with definite pronouncements without explanation. I suspect it functions as a magnet for everybody's personal theories. As such, I've tagged it with {{original research}}. Wikipedia isn't about things "everyone knows"; it's about verifiable information derived from reliable sources. If people can add some citations or sources, that would be great. Otherwise, I suspect it needs some serious culling. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 05:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added a small section on sustainability backstories

Given that this appears to be an increasingly common usage among environmentalists, I thought that clarifying the difference between the environmental and literary meanings of the term was probably helpful to the reader.

[edit] Move?

Move to Backstory? (from Wikipedia:Requested moves#Incomplete and contested proposals Anthony Appleyard 04:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC))

• Merriam-Webster: backstory only
• Random House: backstory (primary); definition reads "also back story"
• American Heritage: backstory only
• Encarta: back-story only
• World Book: back story
• Word Spy: backstory (primary); "also: back-story, back story". Example citation uses backstory; earliest citation uses back story
• Did not find in Chambers, Oxford, Cambridge, or Gage

Seems the hyphenated version is as valid as the single-word or the two-word versions; if it must be moved, backstory seems to have the edge over back story. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 04:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)