Talk:Polemic: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 125:

This is in reference both to some slightly vague/confusing syntax and to the actual content of the article. The former is probably the more easily fixed (certainly it requires less familiarity with the subject), so the latter is the one I will mainly address here. For example: "polemic" can also be used as a synonym for "polemicist". And, um, admittedly that may already make talking about polemic(s) inherently confusing, but perhaps some effort should be dedicated to clarifying such. For example, I edited "A polemic" in the last sentence of the "Overview" section to just "Polemic", to refer as a whole to that style of argument instead of to a specific work ''of'' polemic writing, and also to distinguish it from a person who ''is'' "a polemic". Other changes of this nature might help the article make more sense (to me at least, as I am far from an expert in this area).

Additionally, the explanation of what polemic ''is'', in addition to being a bit syntactically vague, makes the most sense if the reader already has a firm and specific idea of what is meant by things like "dispute" vs. "debate" vs. "argument" (to be honest, I don't myself know if there really ''is'' a specific and distinct definition for each). Is it possible to be more specific here? And again, I might be able to fix the language but then someone else would have to back me up on the content. Thanks - [[User:ReySquared|ReySquared]] ([[User talk:ReySquared|talk]]) 21:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

:I know that Wikipedia is not a dictionary but I still hate the way this article is written. It is written like a paper for university. This article appears to be too confusing and instead of just getting to the point. [[User:In Correct|In Correct]] ([[User talk:In Correct|talk]]) 01:07, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

== Confusion with Apologetics ==