Talk:Going to the People

Page number citations
- for the page numbers for the Yarmololinsky citation, my main concern is that citing every page number separately makes it harder to tell at a glance that all of the information in a given section comes from the same source, while after a certain point it doesn't add too much benefit as far as located the material in the source. I think there's probably a happy medium though between every page number being cited individually and the whole chapter being cited as one. Since the material does seem to be in the same order in the source, maybe one page range of citations for each wiki section might make more sense? &#32;- car chasm (talk) 19:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for raising this here. I like your solution of using the page numbers from each section of the chapter to cut down on excessive citations. Just checked now and the page numbers of each section are: 1) pp. 189-192; 2) pp. 192-194; 3) pp. 194-197; 4) pp. 197-201; 5) pp. 201-205; 6) pp. 205-209. (It also cites two sections from the previous chapter: pp. 181-185; pp. 185-188. And one from the following chapter: pp. 210-213) --Grnrchst (talk) 21:10, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I had in mind - those divisions make sense to me :). &#32;- car chasm (talk) 00:49, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

inaccurate translation
It doesn't mean "going to" the people, it means "walking among". The former implies consultation by an organisation apart from "the people", the latter oneness with the people therefore the distinction is not merely semantic. 209.93.146.3 (talk) 12:18, 20 November 2022 (UTC)