Difference between revisions of "Talk:English Painting"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Italics overkill: Create section)
 
(Removal of sections and other edits)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Italics overkill ==
 
== Italics overkill ==
 
Why ''is practically the entire article written in italics? Is this some sort of formatting error?'' --[[User:JBrown|JBrown]] 21:57, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
 
Why ''is practically the entire article written in italics? Is this some sort of formatting error?'' --[[User:JBrown|JBrown]] 21:57, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Removal of sections and other edits ==
 +
 +
I have removed two sections:
 +
#The intro section, which was copied from [http://www.indopedia.org/English_school_of_painting.html this site] (the reference given). However, there are two problems:
 +
##It's a wiki, and we're generally not supposed to use wikis as references
 +
##That page was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=English_school_of_painting&oldid=8148922 imported] from Wikipedia, so our article copied from Wikipedia, which we have a bunch of more commandments against
 +
#The section on Thomas Gainsborough copied from a book section that doesn't even mention him. The section in question was about Hogarth (possibly William, but there is more than one British painter with that last name, it seems, so I'm not sure). This is suspicious behavior ''at best''.
 +
 +
I also changed the remaining italics to a "cquote" template to better highlight that the material is quoted. As can be seen above, ''long passages that are formatted like this look weird, and people aren't quite sure just why they are formatted like this.''
 +
 +
Do not revert my edits without good justification. --[[User:JBrown|JBrown]] 07:25, 12 May 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 05:25, 12 May 2008

Italics overkill

Why is practically the entire article written in italics? Is this some sort of formatting error? --JBrown 21:57, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

Removal of sections and other edits

I have removed two sections:

  1. The intro section, which was copied from this site (the reference given). However, there are two problems:
    1. It's a wiki, and we're generally not supposed to use wikis as references
    2. That page was imported from Wikipedia, so our article copied from Wikipedia, which we have a bunch of more commandments against
  2. The section on Thomas Gainsborough copied from a book section that doesn't even mention him. The section in question was about Hogarth (possibly William, but there is more than one British painter with that last name, it seems, so I'm not sure). This is suspicious behavior at best.

I also changed the remaining italics to a "cquote" template to better highlight that the material is quoted. As can be seen above, long passages that are formatted like this look weird, and people aren't quite sure just why they are formatted like this.

Do not revert my edits without good justification. --JBrown 07:25, 12 May 2008 (EDT)