Talk:Outdoor literature

[Untitled]
Removed the following external link:


 * Classic travel books for download

This is actually an interesting commercial service that sells PDF's of scanned books, but it's inappropriate for Wikipedia to list individual commercial book sellers. --Stbalbach 00:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Travel writing
Can outdoor literature better be described as a sub-genre, or type of travel literature? Also, doesn't the relation between this article, and the one on nature writing need to be clarified? or would it be better to combine them? Rwood128 (talk) 22:17, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Fiction/non-fiction?
Should this novel be included as an example of outdoor literature: "Theodore Taylor (1969). The Cay"? It would seem better to exclude novels --- or, create a separate article or, at least divide this article into two parts. Rwood128 (talk) 16:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: The panel is highly and exactly relevant
Re recent revert of an edit. The panel distracts from the article rather than adding content to it. Perhaps I react this way because I've rarely seen it used on any other literature page. If it is so relevant why doesn't it appear in British literature, English literature, Irish literature, the Novel, Dickens, Modernist poetry, etc? Cannot it be placed in a compressed version at the foot of the page? Rwood128 (talk) 12:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes it could, it is common for templates to appear that way, and you're welcome to make one (try cloning and then editing an existing one in your user space) -- if indeed there isn't one already. It sounds as if some work on harmonisation and standardisation would be useful. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:21, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll see if I can do it.Rwood128 (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Notability
This article is problematic for two reasons, both to do with Notability.


 * 1) It seems to overlap strongly with Travel literature, and perhaps less seriously with Natural history and outdoor sports. If it is to survive as an article on a genre, it requires to be clearly distinct as a category, which means it does not overlap. Therefore it must at least exclude travel writing (and say so explicitly in the lead). Thesiger's travels are definitely travel literature, for instance, as are travels with or without donkeys in the Cevennes.


 * 1) At the moment the article is almost uncited, and such cites as exist are mainly to the books themselves or the societies that promote them, so they are not Reliable sources. The article requires clear evidence from external authorities that the genre exists, with cites (and probably quotes) to prove what those authorities say that it is, and that it is distinct. If nobody reliable says it's actually distinct from travel lit, it isn't distinct, and should at once be merged and redirected to that article.

Further, each book in the list should have a citation to prove that a WP:RS actually believes it belongs in the genre, otherwise frankly the article is WP:OR. All uncited books should be deleted from the list, and by the same logic, if the list is empty, the article should be deleted also. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, an earlier comment you made suggested that a merge might be called for here. This seems perfectly reasonable to me. Outdoor literature is a sub-genre of travel literature. Feel free to to start a merge with travel literature. Rwood128 (talk) 12:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merger

 * We've already started the discussion, so, everyone, it is proposed to merge this article into Travel literature. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Cannot the merge now be made, as there is no objection? Rwood128 (talk) 13:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, actually. I suggested above that the right course would be to remove travel books from this list, as that is a clearly-defined genre. Outdoor topics like camping or hillwalking or running or climbing are not necessarily travel, are they? So I think that earlier suggestion was the right one, that we should carefully distinguish this from travel. If on the other hand this genre cannot be defined sharply, then it should be deleted. Thus 'Climbing literature' I would say was easy to define; 'Hillwalking literature' similarly. Those might make better categories. So, I wouldn't like to make the merge, sorry. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:07, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem, it is useful to re-think things. However, much outdoor literature overlaps with travel literature. One example is descriptions of long walks, like Patrick Leigh Fermor's A Time of Gifts (1977) Between the Woods and the Water (1986), and The Broken Road: Travels from Bulgaria to Mount Athos (2013). The now deceased Fermor has been described as "Britain's greatest living travel writer". Though your comments, about Robert Louis Stevenson in the Cevennes, suggests that you might not agree? Hiking/mountain walking guide books, like those published by Cicerone are travel books, but they deal with an outdoor recreation. Similarly I see many hill walking books as examples of both genres, and the same can be said of climbing literature. Are you suggesting new article for climbing literature, etc.? Given that Travel literature is such a short article, it seemed to me that a merge would be sensible, with the possibility of later sub-dividing, if the article ever becomes unwieldy. Rwood128 (talk) 17:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

May I respectfully suggest, in view of the above, that the merge banners now be removed (or the articles merged), as this dithering can only discourage editing of this article. Chiswick Chap, you proposed the merger, and I agreed, and there were no other comments. Rwood128 (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)