Talk:Oscar Wilde bibliography

MarnetteD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MarnetteD/archive19#Oscar_Wilde Ah! but you are just bossing around! All the sources are in Mason & your version has no other sources. I added online link to Mason, I corrected all the errors in your version, I made additions, I retained Clark links which do not work & have nothing to do with bibliography really but manuscripts instead, I have retained the mention of Oxford Major Works 2000 so as to cut absoutily no info that was before, there are links to (all wikisource now) texts of exatly the same four items as before, everything is formatted better as before. Please relax. Two worries: (1) (as asked before see link) can I make a single article for Intentions? (2) the nonsensical "infobox bibliography" works in neither version Regards (your doing good job wikipedia cool) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.109.237 (talk) 22:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


 * As stated several times in the edit summary you remove sourced info. One referenced links no longer work there are other ways to retain them than you version.You make unsourced changes. You provided poorly formatted info and unneeded info in the complete works situation. You are undoing proper changes by other editors. You are now editing as a sock puppet. All of these violate Wikipedia policies. At one point you stated that this page did not matter to you yet your actions show that to be incorrect. MarnetteD | Talk 22:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I have provided links to policy pages that you should read before editing here and you have ignored those. MarnetteD | Talk 22:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


 * page matters little alright, rather more curious about funny sad mindset of wikipedians as it turns out now. can you read what i've repeatedly said/asked before? why do you repeat all your fantasy "sock" me removing sourced info if links are kept, what errors my version contains, or a single error? what proper changes i undo? all nonsense. info about complete works quite useful why not? Why music under misattributed for you? Canterville ghost in wrong collection? etc etc. you choose to pleasure your ego & "sock" it is all for anyone who cares to see if anyone does. are most other editors the same? when say ktlynch undoes my mr w h removal I agree citation requared ok thats perfectly reasonable. you just get your sad stupid kicks by "winning". Karlis44 194.70.181.1 (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

attributed stories
hello, could someone who feels competent spare a few words on works which are sometimes attributed to Wilde, please? I mean mostly the stories published in French in Paris shortly after his death, reportedly translations from English originals printed in unidentified US magazines.

Robert Harborough Sherard, The life of Oscar Wilde, London 1906, p. 460, claimed that they were "fraudulently attributed to Oscar Wilde, generally by unscrupulous publishers" and as far as I have managed to ascertain they are generally ignored in English-language literature (though except Harborough's claim I have failed to find newer explicit falsification claims). On the other hand, some are repeatedly attributed to Wilde in the Spanish linguistic realm. This is the case of Ego te absolvo, a short story set in one of the Spanish civil wars, included e.g. in Cuentos de Oscar Wilde, Santiago de Chile 2005, ISBN 9789561117549, or in the online Biblioteca Virtual de Miguel de Cervantes, available here.

thanks, --Dd1495 (talk) 07:43, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

История
Оскар уайльд 84.54.80.65 (talk) 14:08, 3 June 2022 (UTC)