This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Christoph Bartholomäus Anton Migazzi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
"Count Christoph Cardinal Anton Migazzi" is a completely nonsensical sequence of names. The "Cardinal" cannot be put between two first names.-- 194.166.46.194 ( talk) 20:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
We meet again, Gnome. Your revision has been reverted. There may be concern over WP:POV with phrasing, as the author often characterizes the subject in flattering terms, but I believe this to be his or her way of paying homage and it makes the article a good read. Have you found evidence of original research? - Conservatrix ( talk) 18:39, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
I had requested your review of this page and here result as an obstacle. Would it be possible to mantain the original style while accommodating your changes? - Conservatrix ( talk) 19:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Christoph Bartholomäus Anton Migazzi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Count Christoph Cardinal Anton Migazzi" is a completely nonsensical sequence of names. The "Cardinal" cannot be put between two first names.-- 194.166.46.194 ( talk) 20:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
We meet again, Gnome. Your revision has been reverted. There may be concern over WP:POV with phrasing, as the author often characterizes the subject in flattering terms, but I believe this to be his or her way of paying homage and it makes the article a good read. Have you found evidence of original research? - Conservatrix ( talk) 18:39, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
I had requested your review of this page and here result as an obstacle. Would it be possible to mantain the original style while accommodating your changes? - Conservatrix ( talk) 19:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)