Talk:Works about Mircea Eliade


 * Oppose. You cannot include in the Mircea Eliade article only the critical work, while his scholar contributions are relegated into some external article/list. It's a simple problem of fair treatment. Dpotop 19:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I commented on this at talk:Mircea Eliade. I support the merge because this morning I was looking for a book title about Eliade that I could not easily find because it was in a separate article i.e. this article. Andries 19:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Support merge back into Mircea Eliade. The book by Daniel Pals is not very critical. I prefer to have it moved into the article Mircea Eliade or even better ro merge this whole article back into Mircea Eliade. Andries 17:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Support merge back into Mircea Eliade and Rename section to "Critical works about"The separation went against consensus, and was not argued. I also note that it is the topic of experimentation - the added sentence was weasel-worded ("of his youth", as if the works themselves don't talk about the convictions beyond his youth), and introduces a criterion that artificially separates Mr. Ţurcanu from the others. It is also EXTREMELY FUNNY THAT DPOTOP UNDERSTOOD "CRITICAL" TO SAY "NEGATIVE", WHEN THIS IS IN FACT ABOUT LITERARY CRITICISM OF ALL SORTS. Dahn 19:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Support merge back into Mircea Eliade.--Cberlet 21:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC) I really hope I got this "support" / "oppose" stuff right. Just change it if I got it wrong. It was quite hard to figure out what some folks actually wanted. Apologies for errors in advance.--Cberlet 21:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)