Talk:List of bibliographies of works on Catullus

Other bibliographies of Catullus
The inclusion criterion for this list requires added bibliographies be listed or discussed in an independent source as being a bibliography of Catullus. Accordingly, this means there is necessarily some delay between a new bibliography of Catullus being published and it being mentioned by additional sources. This section in the talk page is meant for drawing editors' attention to bibliographies of Catullus which might potentially be able to be added to this article, provided they get mentioned by other sources. Keep a look out for future sources discussing these bibliographies! Umimmak (talk) 02:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  — Umimmak (talk) 02:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  — APh LVI No. 1002 (p. 62) writes: "Bilan des recherches effectuées depuis le debut des annees 70." See also Skinner (2015, p. 191). Umimmak (talk) 05:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * 3)  — APh  LXI No. 948 (p. 67) writes: "Scholarly criticism of Miser Catulle provides a microcosmic history of the structural interpretation of classical poetry." See also Skinner (2015, pp. 191–192). Umimmak (talk) 05:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Article title
How is List of bibliographies of works on Catullus distinguished from, say, List of Catullus bibliographies? The entries of the list are essentially Catullus bibliographies, no? czar  03:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * from WP:BIB: Topical bibliographies where the topic is a person should be named: Bibliography of works on John Doe. This eliminates confusion with John Doe bibliography which lists works by John Doe (an author bibliography). See, e.g., featured list Bibliography of works on Madonna which is distinct from Madonna bibliography. This is not a list of lists of works Catullus, but rather a list of lists of works  him. Happy to workshop different article titles, if you like, but that's what I based this title off of. Umimmak (talk) 03:53, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! My first thought is that the plural "bibliographies" could cover the distinction but that gets into WP:DIFFPLURAL and your position is reasonable. Another option is to do something like Metabibliography of Catullus or Metabibliography of works on Catullus (if it isn't already clear that the bibliography of bibliographies would be about his works rather than his life) but I don't feel particularly strongly—just wanted to ask. czar  05:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I don’t really feel strongly about the title either, so I'm happy to move it. There just wasn't much precedent to go on from other Wikipedia articles so I just tried to figure things out from WP:BIB. I’m not opposed to a title with the word metabibliography, but my fear is that isn’t a common enough term; I can’t say I came across it once in my sources. I don’t know if FLC bots prevent this from being renamed while this process is happening, or if it should be discussed there as well to get more eyes on it. Umimmak (talk) 19:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)