Talk:Non-conventional literature

Still plenty of gray despite the digital revolution
Can an argument be made that there is no longer really a need to discuss "non conventional" or grey literature, because published documents that are not commercially available are not readily available on the Internet? [unsigned]


 * Not really. This concept is still just as important as ever, because lots of useful information is stovepiped within internal reports inside corporations, government agencies, etc. And this principle still applies in the digital era, because a lot depends on the operational definition of "published". A report that's locked away behind a firewall on a corporation's intranet is quite gray indeed for anyone in the rest of the world who might potentially be able to benefit from that information. One good example is info related to the history of technology. Lumbercutter 00:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Grey/Gray literature
Should this page not redirect to the Gray literature article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.95.29.18 (talk) 21:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC).


 * Yes, it should. Currently, "Grey literature" is a redirect to here, while "Gray literature" is a completely separate article. In other words, meta-stovepiping! I added a merge-suggestion tag to the article. Lumbercutter 00:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)