![]() | Four Times of the Day is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 3, 2007. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
January 24, 2007. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that
William Hogarth's
Four Times of the Day (pictured) shows a sign for a pie shop with a picture of the severed head of
John the Baptist and the words "Good Eating"? |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
A very enjoyable and carefully written article; I would certainly vote support if it went to FAC. I love Hogarth and have read every word of Uglow's biography, a dense but absorbing read. The close analysis here seems well referenced and accurate, although one could go on analysing Hogarth's satirical stuff forever. I jotted down the following notes: please feel free to ignore them, of course.
Well, I have really enjoyed spending some time with this article and these pictures. qp10qp 03:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Great article! I enjoyed reading this alot. Awesome work guys, and fully deserving of the front page. Dxco 03:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I was reading this article, and in the Night section it says Shaving, bleeding, and teeth drawn with a touch, and get teabagged by Howard Stern for free! That teabagging thing isn't supposed to be there, is it?
24.80.227.3 09:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
This is not a comment that I am expecting definite action on, but on reading the article I was struck by the use of various class-based social descriptions through out, viz: 'upper and middle classes', 'middle class life', 'lower classes' (twice), 'slovenliness of the working classes'. While I'll agree that this is a useful, quick way of describing the social relations in Hogarth's works, it is arguably a bit anachronistic to say that eighteenth century England had the modern upper/middle/working system of class divisions, or that contemporaries like Hogarth would have viewed society as being partitioned in this way. I don't think grouping the black man, reasonably well dressed woman and the ragged-clothed street urchins in 'Noon' all as 'working class' gives a particularly accurate impression of eighteenth century social relations, for example. (Although it could be argued that Hogarth meant to imply this through the simple left/right division of the picture.)
At this stage, when we're talking about an encylopedia article a few thousand words long, I don't think this is especially important, as the article is a concise summary rather than a full, academic treatment. Nonetheless it would be nice, in the long run, if a more nuanced treatment of social relations could be developed, so that unfamiliar readers are not led into uncritically thinking that such class categories were as defined then as they are now. Ycdkwm 19:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
The 'Reception' section talks about the 1745 auction, but not the prices. I had to search back through the rest of the article to find the prices in the 'Background' section. Is it possible to repeat the prices (and give the total) in the later section? Carcharoth 12:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for writing and featuring this article, Featured articles editors. --- Sluzzelin talk 07:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I have a couple of the original prints in the attic. Anyone know if they are worth anything?-- BozMo talk 09:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
The recent tagging of "said" in this sentence:
seems unnecessary to me; the sentence is cited to Jenny Uglow and the attribution is no doubt described there. I don't see a need for further clarification. If the details of why this is thought to be the case are of interest, then they could be added, but there seems nothing wrong with the current version. Hence I have removed the tag. Mike Christie (talk) 12:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Four Times of the Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Four Times of the Day is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 3, 2007. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
January 24, 2007. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that
William Hogarth's
Four Times of the Day (pictured) shows a sign for a pie shop with a picture of the severed head of
John the Baptist and the words "Good Eating"? |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
A very enjoyable and carefully written article; I would certainly vote support if it went to FAC. I love Hogarth and have read every word of Uglow's biography, a dense but absorbing read. The close analysis here seems well referenced and accurate, although one could go on analysing Hogarth's satirical stuff forever. I jotted down the following notes: please feel free to ignore them, of course.
Well, I have really enjoyed spending some time with this article and these pictures. qp10qp 03:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Great article! I enjoyed reading this alot. Awesome work guys, and fully deserving of the front page. Dxco 03:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I was reading this article, and in the Night section it says Shaving, bleeding, and teeth drawn with a touch, and get teabagged by Howard Stern for free! That teabagging thing isn't supposed to be there, is it?
24.80.227.3 09:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
This is not a comment that I am expecting definite action on, but on reading the article I was struck by the use of various class-based social descriptions through out, viz: 'upper and middle classes', 'middle class life', 'lower classes' (twice), 'slovenliness of the working classes'. While I'll agree that this is a useful, quick way of describing the social relations in Hogarth's works, it is arguably a bit anachronistic to say that eighteenth century England had the modern upper/middle/working system of class divisions, or that contemporaries like Hogarth would have viewed society as being partitioned in this way. I don't think grouping the black man, reasonably well dressed woman and the ragged-clothed street urchins in 'Noon' all as 'working class' gives a particularly accurate impression of eighteenth century social relations, for example. (Although it could be argued that Hogarth meant to imply this through the simple left/right division of the picture.)
At this stage, when we're talking about an encylopedia article a few thousand words long, I don't think this is especially important, as the article is a concise summary rather than a full, academic treatment. Nonetheless it would be nice, in the long run, if a more nuanced treatment of social relations could be developed, so that unfamiliar readers are not led into uncritically thinking that such class categories were as defined then as they are now. Ycdkwm 19:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
The 'Reception' section talks about the 1745 auction, but not the prices. I had to search back through the rest of the article to find the prices in the 'Background' section. Is it possible to repeat the prices (and give the total) in the later section? Carcharoth 12:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for writing and featuring this article, Featured articles editors. --- Sluzzelin talk 07:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I have a couple of the original prints in the attic. Anyone know if they are worth anything?-- BozMo talk 09:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
The recent tagging of "said" in this sentence:
seems unnecessary to me; the sentence is cited to Jenny Uglow and the attribution is no doubt described there. I don't see a need for further clarification. If the details of why this is thought to be the case are of interest, then they could be added, but there seems nothing wrong with the current version. Hence I have removed the tag. Mike Christie (talk) 12:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Four Times of the Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)