Talk:Oulipo

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Literature Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. France Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Should we try to keep the names of his works in English? The article is in English and when the parallels in French are created (I'll see if I can create some of them soon) we may have some confusion. I'll see the standards and go from there. Brusegadi 05:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's a French acronym which has no equivalent in English.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 02:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the Oulipians lacking Wikipedia articles seem to have existing articles on the French Wikipedia - might it be useful to link to these? Examples: Paul Fournel, Jean Queval, Albert-Marie Schmidt, Latis / Emmanuel Peillet. These would be great sources for English articles if someone was able to translate. --Killick 05:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oui, d'accord. --UnicornTapestry (talk) 02:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For those who follow it, it's this weekend in Paris.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed a lot of the members listed in "Founders" and "Current" are red tags and that you're missing at least two notable members: Umberto Eco and Eugene Ionesco. That may be because of the rigid structure of the member list. I think Eco & Ionesco should be mentioned somewhere, if not on the members then somewhere, since they are arguably as notable as the red tag people.F. Simon Grant (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consider:
" . . . 'sew' and 'beau' could not [be used in a univocalism]."
While this is technically true ("beau" cannot be used in a univocalism, so certainly we cannot use both "sew" and "beau"), I think it is misleading. There is nothing wrong with "sew," why mention it at all? Nowhyok (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to leave a message here to see who was working on this page and how I could help. I'm a student and I have an assignment to one of my class that I need to make a 3.000 words contribution. I'm French and I know about Oulipo and I look forward to this ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugozylb (talk • contribs) 02:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just noted the holy-cross icons that appear after some of the names in the "List of Members" section. It's the first time I've seen this in Wikipedia, and I wondered what they meant. I *assume* they come to mark people who have passed away. But if so, it seems to me that there should be another way to mark this (e.g. write (deceased) near the name), if not for any other reason, then for the simple reason that not all of them were Christian. The cross is obviously a Christian symbol. For a (notable) instance - Georges Perec was Jewish.

Personally, I don't see why Oulipo-members' religious affiliations (to the extent they have/had such) have relevance to this article (but maybe I'm missing something); nor why they should be marked near their names in the list, so I'd vouch for just deleting them. But if there's a good reason for the markers, then at least I suggest they should be changed, because the current marking is misleading (and may even be offensive to some of the people on the list if they do not consider themselves Christian, or to other Wikipedia readers)).

(If I'm wrong about what the symbols mean, I'd be happy to learn about this. Though that would also imply that other people might get this wrong too). Ynagar (talk) 14:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you about what the symbols mean, and I would be happy to see them removed or replaced (it is not entirely clear why it is necessary to include that information). --

talk) 16:38, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Also, it is not clear why we should have a single list of living and deceased members; the article says people "are still considered members after their deaths" but of course this has no citation and there is not particular reason that Wikipedia should be bound by an unattributed passive-voice declaration like this. --

talk) 18:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Actually I was so pleased with this idea that I went ahead and implemented it. --

talk) 18:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Cool, thanks JBL! Looks good! Ynagar (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Oulipo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060908104721/http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/5916 to http://poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/5916
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20021016103903/http://quatramaran.ens.fr/mailman/listinfo/oulipo to http://quatramaran.ens.fr/mailman/listinfo/oulipo/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:43, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]