This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pearl of Kuwait 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 page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 12 January 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep and clean-up. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Pearl of Kuwait be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The issues mentioned are hard to understand. It says that the article has no links to other Wiki pages, but there are many. It is not an orphan article as it is relating to many others and more directly to one called The Peregrina Pearl. Please can you help me better understand how i can change this article to make it comply? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Symbolic & Chase ( talk • contribs) 16:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Then if deleting the whole article is not to your liking, I propose we blank essentially the entire thing and start it from scratch. The original writer of the article was the current owner of the alleged pearl. The article is therefore a long string of garbage that just tries to prove it was worn by Mary Tudor. That may be the case, but as you know there is either an $11 million pretender of the same pearl, or the one mentioned in the article is a recent find that has the financial backing and marketing prowess of people who would take advantage of British sentiments. Look back at the history of the article, and it is obvious that this article.... on an encyclopedia... is an advertising medium. I like to saw logs! ( talk) 18:38, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
This serves as a summary of my understanding of the disputed provenance of a pearl now (2015) in possession of a London jewelry company, Symbolic & Chase.
This list, in my opinion, serves as a reason to delete the entire article or wipe out most of it.
At the very least, this article purports to describe a pearl known as Pearl of Kuwait but the article is titled "Mary Tudor pearl." It would be deceitful not to rename the article to reflect its given name, and let the proof be shown however the sources call it. I am going to disrupt the status quo here. I like to saw logs! ( talk) 06:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia page on the Peregrina pearl was edited this morning with the accurate information. The ones that were already there in the 'Elizabeth Taylor' auction catalogue in 2011. The Peregrina pearl never belonged to Mary Tudor as the pearl reached Europe in 1579, long after Mary Tudor had died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jewelsandthegang ( talk • contribs) 13:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pearl of Kuwait 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 page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 12 January 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep and clean-up. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Pearl of Kuwait be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The issues mentioned are hard to understand. It says that the article has no links to other Wiki pages, but there are many. It is not an orphan article as it is relating to many others and more directly to one called The Peregrina Pearl. Please can you help me better understand how i can change this article to make it comply? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Symbolic & Chase ( talk • contribs) 16:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Then if deleting the whole article is not to your liking, I propose we blank essentially the entire thing and start it from scratch. The original writer of the article was the current owner of the alleged pearl. The article is therefore a long string of garbage that just tries to prove it was worn by Mary Tudor. That may be the case, but as you know there is either an $11 million pretender of the same pearl, or the one mentioned in the article is a recent find that has the financial backing and marketing prowess of people who would take advantage of British sentiments. Look back at the history of the article, and it is obvious that this article.... on an encyclopedia... is an advertising medium. I like to saw logs! ( talk) 18:38, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
This serves as a summary of my understanding of the disputed provenance of a pearl now (2015) in possession of a London jewelry company, Symbolic & Chase.
This list, in my opinion, serves as a reason to delete the entire article or wipe out most of it.
At the very least, this article purports to describe a pearl known as Pearl of Kuwait but the article is titled "Mary Tudor pearl." It would be deceitful not to rename the article to reflect its given name, and let the proof be shown however the sources call it. I am going to disrupt the status quo here. I like to saw logs! ( talk) 06:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia page on the Peregrina pearl was edited this morning with the accurate information. The ones that were already there in the 'Elizabeth Taylor' auction catalogue in 2011. The Peregrina pearl never belonged to Mary Tudor as the pearl reached Europe in 1579, long after Mary Tudor had died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jewelsandthegang ( talk • contribs) 13:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)