129:
give the word the benefit of the doubt and having made edits the list to remove things which could not be considered to have been conceived as a "duology" (in the same way that a trilogy might), it became apparent that this page was here just to list series of two films or books, and included some unsuitable entries (Ghostbusters 1 & 2; The Iliad and the
Odyssey). It also became more and more apparent that hardly anything would qualify as a "duology", unless, perhaps, the author had conceived it to be thought of as "The
128:
Whilst "Duology" does seem to be used by some people to describe a cycle of two films or novels, it is not a dictionary defined word. It does not fit into the pattern for trilogy, tetralogy, etc which are made from greek words (whereas this is a hybrid of Latin and Greek). Also, after trying to
187:
can wiktionary be cited as proof a word exists? i believe that the wiktionary entry should be deleted too - it doesn't seem to be a real word - it doesn't have an entry at dictionary.com or any other online dictionary that i can
257:, at best a dicdef, but probably unsourceable as a word. No, Wiktionary cannot be considered a reliable source (itself), nor would a dictionary entry even in a reliable one confer actual notability. I'm very skeptical of
121:
162:
159:
165:
156:
209:
204:
The word certainly exists, and has been used for as long as I can remember (I'm 35) to describe a series of two books telling the same story in two parts. Google finds
133:
Duology" (like the tetralogy "The Alien
Quadrilogy" has been described in marketing materials). I am yet to see an example of "Duology" to be used in this way.
17:
310:
357:
36:
88:
83:
92:
356:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
75:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
314:
306:
53:
335:
218:
195:
174:
138:
339:
327:
318:
281:
243:
222:
199:
178:
169:
142:
57:
278:
240:
205:
309:
or somesuch. They are more or less the same thing, a set of works forming a larger single work.
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
49:
331:
191:
134:
274:
236:
79:
109:
232:
189:
294:
228:
298:
290:
262:
258:
152:
330:. It consists only of a definition, discussion of coinage, and examples.
302:
266:
212:. While Knowledge (XXG) itself isn't to be used as a source, there are
71:
63:
270:
350:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
213:
227:
If you want to delete something at
Wiktionary, you'll have to
116:
105:
101:
97:
265:
as well. These should probably all be redirected to
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
360:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
151:- While duology is a perfectly valid term (
214:154 articles containing the word "duology"
216:at the time of writing. -- JediLofty
168:, the article appears to fall foul of
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
208:for the term and Amazon has
340:22:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
326:Clearly unencyclopedic per
319:08:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
282:06:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
244:06:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
223:15:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
200:15:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
179:14:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
143:13:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
58:12:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
377:
353:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
210:21 results in "Books"
287:Merge & redirect
231:. That project has
233:different criteria
44:The result was
229:bring it up there
368:
355:
172:. -- JediLofty
155:) and there are
119:
113:
95:
34:
376:
375:
371:
370:
369:
367:
366:
365:
364:
358:deletion review
351:
307:series of works
221:
206:107,000 results
177:
115:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
374:
372:
363:
362:
345:
343:
342:
321:
284:
251:
250:
249:
248:
247:
246:
235:than we do. --
225:
217:
182:
181:
173:
126:
125:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
373:
361:
359:
354:
348:
347:
346:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
322:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
285:
283:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
253:
252:
245:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
224:
220:
215:
211:
207:
203:
202:
201:
197:
193:
190:
186:
185:
184:
183:
180:
176:
171:
167:
164:
161:
158:
154:
150:
147:
146:
145:
144:
140:
136:
132:
123:
118:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
352:
349:
344:
323:
286:
254:
163:described as
153:wikt:duology
148:
130:
127:
45:
43:
31:
28:
311:70.51.10.69
269:or perhaps
305:, etc, to
295:quadrilogy
50:PhilKnight
332:Ningauble
328:WP:DICDEF
299:heptalogy
291:tetralogy
263:heptalogy
259:tetralogy
192:Robsinden
170:WP:DICDEF
166:duologies
135:Robsinden
131:something
275:Dhartung
237:Dhartung
122:View log
303:trilogy
267:trilogy
89:protect
84:history
72:Duology
64:Duology
324:Delete
289:this,
271:sequel
255:Delete
149:Delete
117:delete
93:delete
46:delete
188:find!
160:books
120:) – (
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
336:talk
315:talk
279:Talk
273:. --
261:and
241:Talk
219:Talk
196:talk
175:Talk
157:many
139:talk
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
338:)
317:)
301:,
297:,
277:|
239:|
198:)
141:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
334:(
313:(
293:/
194:(
137:(
124:)
114:(
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.