Talk:Contortion

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Circus Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Circus. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.CircusWikipedia:WikiProject CircusTemplate:WikiProject CircusCircus Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Occupations (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations

It is requested that a video clip or video clips be included in this article to improve its quality.

Archives (Index)

2012 2014 2017 2020

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Is that really a robust study? 78.86.6.227 (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This section does not look good: it lacks the introduction that should have explained the reasons for selection of particular performers(cf. MOS:LISTINTRO), has potentially nearly unlimited size (cf. Category:Contortionists that has almost 40 articles of notable contortionists and out list of 18 people plus two red links). IMHO the section shall be rewritten using some source with the list of most know contortionists or deleted altogether. Викидим (talk) 06:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can link to Wiktionary. I think the information in the glossary should be moved to Wiktionary. It will do more people more good there.

Does anyone object to me movint the glossery definitions into Wiktionary? Mark (talk) 23:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The glossary list is specific and useful to the article, and is perfectly acceptable per WP:GLOSSARIES.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]