Talk:Gulliver's Travels

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gulliver's Travels article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 90 days

Novels Top‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Literature Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Straight Lines[edit]

like between an egg opening habit?

no, like vocals/vowels like 'e' are written, straightlined or so, also, softly language softening signals, well, that´s the major difference discussed violently ( heck, don´t ask ) currently — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4DD7:F05:0:5019:B82A:5804:6DE9 (talk) 02:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AshMillette.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zee-Elizabeth-Bee.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The moons of Mars[edit]

And not a mention of the accurate description of the moons of Mars provided in the book? How odd. Has anyone writing this page actually read the book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.195.150.128 (talk) 07:10, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See the more specific article on Laputa. Goustien (talk) 22:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

utvee (utvy?) chayetye ? president.gov.ua/lustration/about from which side to open eggs? in whose command/auftragskommando? leute wir koennen zusammen singen, wir koennen versuchen, die diskussion auf die schlagzeilen der yellow press zu beschraenken, ich bin jenseits meiner optionen: was fuer ideen habt ihr? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4DD7:FA81:0:55FC:A6DA:D408:2C93 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral point of view?[edit]

The section on "misogyny" fails any reasonable test for neutrality.

The content in question is a politically biased, neo-feminist dissertation containing lengthy analyses and quotations by Nussbaum and Needleman Armintor, including this gem:

"male nausea can be used as a pathetic countermeasure against the perceived threat of female consumption."

The entire section in question is a political opinion. Moreover, as a political opinion, it is quite .

Whether or not you personally happen to agree with that particular political perspective is irrelevant. It's a deeply biased political perspective, intentionally expressed in terms that many will find offensive: and as such, it doesn't belong in the current article.

The section should be deleted, or at least moved to a separate article where such polarizing views would be more relevant.

Since that's probably too much to ask, I'm simply making an edit to the section in question.

Before you reflexively restore the text that I'm about to delete, ask yourself:

Is this really a "neutral" point of view? Really? Gonnasoakupthesun (talk) 06:05, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have just restored "the text that I'm about to delete". Whatever the merits of your arguments, your "Since that's probably too much to ask, I'm simply making an edit to the section in question." can hardly be considered a consensus-seeking attitude. Please do not engage in an edit war on this issue and focus on getting consensus on how to move forward on this. The existing version can obviously be improved, but introducing NPOV terms such as "modern feminist scholars", "coarse critique", "gender-focused" and "admit" are clearly not an improvement. Thank you. --Technopat (talk) 21:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]