Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
444 bytes added ,  01:52, December 13, 2007
→‎Arcane British royalty: American importance
Line 530: Line 530:     
::: Well, I went and looked at the entry again, and some of those "notable" things of Henry Liddell do not seem terribly significant in 2007.  I do think the copying by [[Wikipedia]] of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, with its very British view of that outdated world, plays a role here.  Also, not to be overly contentious, but the point is not whether the entry is notable, but that the entry is filled with junk about arcane nobility.  Still, I agree, there might be an even better example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:52, 12 December 2007 (EST)
 
::: Well, I went and looked at the entry again, and some of those "notable" things of Henry Liddell do not seem terribly significant in 2007.  I do think the copying by [[Wikipedia]] of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, with its very British view of that outdated world, plays a role here.  Also, not to be overly contentious, but the point is not whether the entry is notable, but that the entry is filled with junk about arcane nobility.  Still, I agree, there might be an even better example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:52, 12 December 2007 (EST)
 +
:::: Yes, the criticism was not of the article's subject itself, but of some of the trivia in it.  But I do find it annoying when insular Americans judge the merit of something on how important it is to Americans.  And although the connection to Alice in Wonderland is merely trivia, it's ''interesting'' trivia!  (Perhaps it shouldn't be in the introduction, though.) [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:52, 12 December 2007 (EST)
    
= Content Suggestions =  
 
= Content Suggestions =  
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu