This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
English landscape garden 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
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can anyone explain the remark 'No Information is to be applied to my text'. Unless there is a special reason, the request does not seem in the spirit of Wikipedia ( Willow4 07:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC))
I edited the new text added to this article which stated that the Chinese garden was the major influence on the English garden. Some gardens certainly have Chinese elements, but I haven't seen any other sources that make the case that the major English gardens like Stourhead were based on Chinese aestetics. Does anyone else have thoughts on this? SiefkinDR ( talk) 15:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that this article uses some American spellings (center) together with British spellings (modelled). It could be argued that as the first editor used American spellings it should use American spellings. On the other hand it could be argued that as this is about English gardens it should use British spellings. My question is this: Should we leave the spelling alone, or use American or British spellings consistently? What do other editors think?
This is what the Wikipedia policy manual says:
"In general, disputes over which English variety to use in an article are strongly discouraged. Such debates rarely accomplish anything apart from wasting time and engendering controversy. When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change. When no English variety has been established and discussion cannot resolve the issue, the variety used in the first non-stub revision is considered the default. If no English variety was used consistently, the tie is broken by the first post-stub contributor to introduce text written in a particular English variety. The variety established for use in a given article can be documented by placing the appropriate Varieties of English template on its talk page. An article should not be edited or renamed simply to switch from one valid use of English to another. Editors who alter an existing variety can be advised of this guideline via the placement of In a recent edit, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. on their talk pages."
I can undesrtand the feeling that an article about the English garden should be in British English, but in this case the article was originally written in American English, and an article should not be edited simply to change it from one variety of English to another. SiefkinDR ( talk) 18:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
A rather bizarre situation has developed here. This article is called 'English garden' which is a term that seems to be used everywhere except England. In England this type of garden would be called a 'landscape garden' and obviously the term 'English garden' is a broad term that could refer to any type of garden found in England. There is an article called Landscape garden which is a stub but the first line of it says "The term landscape garden is often used to describe the English garden design style characteristic of the eighteenth century..." making it in effect a redirect to this article. How about we merge the two and change the title of this article to "English landscape garden" which would cover both terms. As it is, the article already begins with explanation of the different terms and both terms would redirect to it. I know a merger has been proposed before but it was years ago and there was no discussion at the time. Richerman (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree; I think the English landscape garden title would be correct, and that the two articles could be merged. SiefkinDR ( talk) 07:17, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The section of the article on Lancelot Brown claims that he began his career in 1740 as a gardener at Stowe under Charles Bridgeman, but the article on Charles Bridgeman puts his date of death at 1738. One of them's got to be wrong, but which? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.83.66 ( talk) 17:33, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
As a result of the merger proposals above, "English landscape garden" subsumed "landscape garden." This may be inadequate for an entry with an international scope, both because "English" is not used in England to describe the style, and because the style developed in unique ways in distinct locations throughout the century. "Landscape Garden", however, is overly broad and may not signify the eighteenth-century development. I propose changing the current title to "picturesque landscape garden," which has been preferred in publications on the development of this style in Europe. EWArthistory ( talk) 18:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
English landscape garden 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
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can anyone explain the remark 'No Information is to be applied to my text'. Unless there is a special reason, the request does not seem in the spirit of Wikipedia ( Willow4 07:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC))
I edited the new text added to this article which stated that the Chinese garden was the major influence on the English garden. Some gardens certainly have Chinese elements, but I haven't seen any other sources that make the case that the major English gardens like Stourhead were based on Chinese aestetics. Does anyone else have thoughts on this? SiefkinDR ( talk) 15:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that this article uses some American spellings (center) together with British spellings (modelled). It could be argued that as the first editor used American spellings it should use American spellings. On the other hand it could be argued that as this is about English gardens it should use British spellings. My question is this: Should we leave the spelling alone, or use American or British spellings consistently? What do other editors think?
This is what the Wikipedia policy manual says:
"In general, disputes over which English variety to use in an article are strongly discouraged. Such debates rarely accomplish anything apart from wasting time and engendering controversy. When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change. When no English variety has been established and discussion cannot resolve the issue, the variety used in the first non-stub revision is considered the default. If no English variety was used consistently, the tie is broken by the first post-stub contributor to introduce text written in a particular English variety. The variety established for use in a given article can be documented by placing the appropriate Varieties of English template on its talk page. An article should not be edited or renamed simply to switch from one valid use of English to another. Editors who alter an existing variety can be advised of this guideline via the placement of In a recent edit, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. on their talk pages."
I can undesrtand the feeling that an article about the English garden should be in British English, but in this case the article was originally written in American English, and an article should not be edited simply to change it from one variety of English to another. SiefkinDR ( talk) 18:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
A rather bizarre situation has developed here. This article is called 'English garden' which is a term that seems to be used everywhere except England. In England this type of garden would be called a 'landscape garden' and obviously the term 'English garden' is a broad term that could refer to any type of garden found in England. There is an article called Landscape garden which is a stub but the first line of it says "The term landscape garden is often used to describe the English garden design style characteristic of the eighteenth century..." making it in effect a redirect to this article. How about we merge the two and change the title of this article to "English landscape garden" which would cover both terms. As it is, the article already begins with explanation of the different terms and both terms would redirect to it. I know a merger has been proposed before but it was years ago and there was no discussion at the time. Richerman (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree; I think the English landscape garden title would be correct, and that the two articles could be merged. SiefkinDR ( talk) 07:17, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The section of the article on Lancelot Brown claims that he began his career in 1740 as a gardener at Stowe under Charles Bridgeman, but the article on Charles Bridgeman puts his date of death at 1738. One of them's got to be wrong, but which? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.83.66 ( talk) 17:33, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
As a result of the merger proposals above, "English landscape garden" subsumed "landscape garden." This may be inadequate for an entry with an international scope, both because "English" is not used in England to describe the style, and because the style developed in unique ways in distinct locations throughout the century. "Landscape Garden", however, is overly broad and may not signify the eighteenth-century development. I propose changing the current title to "picturesque landscape garden," which has been preferred in publications on the development of this style in Europe. EWArthistory ( talk) 18:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)