This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article
relates to the British Museum. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one, as needed.British MuseumWikipedia:GLAM/British MuseumTemplate:WikiProject British MuseumBritish Museum-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
Untitled
Where does this come from? (Nothing links to it, I mean.)
Adam Bishop 23:25, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
After thinking about it for a few weeks, I have decided to revert Quinoaeater's edit changing animal to mammal. I understand the difference, and do not think "mammal" is the appropriate word. The animals on the fuller brooch are so stylized as to make their type uncertain. At least one of them appears to a winged quadruped. (The on at approximately the one o'clock position on the brooch). Although I have copies of the image, I am uncertain of their copyright status and can not upload them here. However, an image of the Fuller Brooch, or a replica, can be seen
here.
Move to Fuller Brooch
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk) 21:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose Uhhh, I don't think this is a case of proper name, rather I think its a common noun (the word brooch that is). This is clearly seen by the fact that there is no shortage of google book search results that use brooch in lowercase
[1]. 01:19, 21 March 2010
User:Labattblueboy
In what sense would it be a common noun? There is no type of "Fuller brooch" there is just the one, and it is always known by this name. Obviously, the BM use the capital
[2] as do at least as many of the ghits, including a preponerance of the more recent ones. When in doubt we should follow the owning institution.
Johnbod (
talk) 01:27, 21 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Change to Neutral. The article is severely lacking in terms of citation and references. I really don't see citing the British Museum website as sufficient. Nevertheless, I am not going to oppose the move because the standard for archaeological items is capitalize (as in done for chalices). --
Labattblueboy (
talk) 03:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Support. Just picked out The Making of England, The Golden Age of Anglo-Saxon Art and the Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England to see what they make of it, and all three happen to agree on "Fuller Brooch", with a capital (like the
Alfred Jewel).
Cavila (
talk) 12:00, 29 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article
relates to the British Museum. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one, as needed.British MuseumWikipedia:GLAM/British MuseumTemplate:WikiProject British MuseumBritish Museum-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
Untitled
Where does this come from? (Nothing links to it, I mean.)
Adam Bishop 23:25, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
After thinking about it for a few weeks, I have decided to revert Quinoaeater's edit changing animal to mammal. I understand the difference, and do not think "mammal" is the appropriate word. The animals on the fuller brooch are so stylized as to make their type uncertain. At least one of them appears to a winged quadruped. (The on at approximately the one o'clock position on the brooch). Although I have copies of the image, I am uncertain of their copyright status and can not upload them here. However, an image of the Fuller Brooch, or a replica, can be seen
here.
Move to Fuller Brooch
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk) 21:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose Uhhh, I don't think this is a case of proper name, rather I think its a common noun (the word brooch that is). This is clearly seen by the fact that there is no shortage of google book search results that use brooch in lowercase
[1]. 01:19, 21 March 2010
User:Labattblueboy
In what sense would it be a common noun? There is no type of "Fuller brooch" there is just the one, and it is always known by this name. Obviously, the BM use the capital
[2] as do at least as many of the ghits, including a preponerance of the more recent ones. When in doubt we should follow the owning institution.
Johnbod (
talk) 01:27, 21 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Change to Neutral. The article is severely lacking in terms of citation and references. I really don't see citing the British Museum website as sufficient. Nevertheless, I am not going to oppose the move because the standard for archaeological items is capitalize (as in done for chalices). --
Labattblueboy (
talk) 03:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Support. Just picked out The Making of England, The Golden Age of Anglo-Saxon Art and the Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England to see what they make of it, and all three happen to agree on "Fuller Brooch", with a capital (like the
Alfred Jewel).
Cavila (
talk) 12:00, 29 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.