Talk:Novelas ejemplares

Novelas ejemplares is a set of novellas, not short stories
Dear all,

sorry, but Novelas ejemplares is a set of novellas, not short stories.

Best regards, --Hgfernan (talk) 19:00, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Please note that I've applied the KISS principle to the lead of this article. As there had been various changes to the opening paragraph during the evolution of the article, too many attempts to define 'short story' and 'novella' had become tangled and reader unfriendly. The term 'novella' in the English language has not changed, therefore there is no rationale for explaining it as a link exists for those who don't know what it is.


 * I've removed 'genre' from the equation as 'Short story collection' is not a genre. I'll leave it blank in case someone has better idea as to the genre they qualify for. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Forms of the title
A couple of people have privately questioned my edits of 23:54, 19 March 2015, and I am happy to explain them here. I believe that this article, in English, in this English-language encyclopedia, is correctly titled "Novelas ejemplares" because that is the most frequent way those works are referred to by authors writing in English. In recent years, in books published in English "Novelas ejemplares" has outnumbered "Exemplary Novels" by approximately 100 to 1. I base my judgments of the frequency of usage on the graphs of the Google Books Ngram Viewer, at . I don't know a better source for conventional language that is supported by a greater number of published writers. In the first sentence of the article, I believe it is best to mention the conventional title first, followed in parentheses by an English translation, for explanatory purposes, rather than vice versa. I think the infobox also should use the conventional title, rather than a derived title. I think it is appropriate to display the graphic of the first edition, with the archaic spelling "exemplares", and to comment on it in the caption to that graphic, but there is no need for that spelling anywhere else in the article. In my edit (now undone) I repunctuated the first two sentences in order to present the name of the author, Cervantes, in the first sentence. In an article that introduces a literary work, it seems strange to arrive at the end of the first sentence without knowing the name of the author. I was asked, if we spell "ejemplares" with J, then should we not also spell "Quixote" with J? Granted, it's inconsistent, but my answer is no. In recent books in English that mention these works, "ejemplares" outnumbers "exemplares" by approximately 19 to 1, and "Don Quixote" outnumbers "Don Quijote" by at least 7 to 1. Kotabatubara (talk) 05:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Having check Ngram here, I would agree that, since the 1960s to 1970s, the usage of "Novelas ejemplares" in English language texts has become the norm, therefore I've self-reverted to the change to the lead instigated by . If any other editors feel that this is subject to further scrutiny, feel free to argue your case here. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)