Talk:Nova revija

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Slovenia High‑importance

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia 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.SloveniaWikipedia:WikiProject SloveniaTemplate:WikiProject SloveniaSlovenia articles

High

This disambiguation page has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Slovenia to-do list:

Here are some tasks you can do (watch):

Requests: Jože Tisnikar (sl), Protestant Reformation in the Slovene Lands (sl), Metlika black (sl)
Wikify: Russia–Slovenia relations
Unreferenced: Inner Carniola, Litostroj, Pavel Golia, Predjama Castle
Cleanup: Edvard Ravnikar, Škofja Loka, Inex-Adria Aviopromet Flight 1308
Expand: Education in Slovenia
Stubs: Ajdovi žganci, Čop Street, Omar Naber, Radenska
NPOV: Gregorij Rožman, Siddharta (band)
Portal maintenance: Update News, Did you know, announcements, and suggest Selected article and picture
Help assess the quality of 63 unassessed articles
Take/Add requested photographs

Proposal to split[edit]

It is not clear right away from the article in its current form what refers to the magazine and what to the publishing company. I think they should be discussed in two separate articles. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:14, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The split can be considered: but right now, we have very little information for the publishing house; I'd wait to have more of it (or, alternatively, to add more data when splitting the article). As for now, it seems to me that the article differentiates fairly well between the journal and the publishing house (there're two different sections, while in the "Contributions" section, there's a separate paragraph regarding the publ. house). Viator slovenicus (talk) 12:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then at least the material should be reorganized. The lead defines the publishing house not the magazine. It should also be stated more clearly whether the 'Contributors' refers to the authors published by the magazine or the editors of the publishing company. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can also split it. In this case, we would have to create a disambiguation page. Plus, the article on the publishing house should be expanded (if we just move the data, we'll create a stub). Or we can keep it (for the moment or for longer), and re-write what has to be re-written. Both solutions are perfectly ok in my view. Viator slovenicus (talk) 13:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's better to split it. If you're willing to expand it, that's welcome, but otherwise I don't see a problem in creating another stub. It's more important that it's easily verifiable through the provided references. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then. Nut make it sure to create a disambiguation page, cause most of the links point just to Nova revija. Viator slovenicus (talk) 10:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]