This article was nominated for deletion on 26 September 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am going to remove these two paragraphs:
There is no problem with Lillich's book; the problem is that, if you actually read what she wrote, and compare it to the above summary of what she wrote (mostly the work of the now-banned User:Paul Bedson), you realise that the above is a rather distorted and confused recitation of what she has to say. For example, the first point, that Pseudo-Abdias was "copied" in Ancient Greek by St. Theodore and then translated into Latin by Anastasius Bibliothecarius – if you actually read what Lillich has to say, it is clear she is talking about a completely different book (p. 46):
Lilich is trying to explain why a particular stained glass image disagrees with the text of Pseudo-Abdias, and does so by citing completely different manuscripts. Bedson's text completely confuses those other manuscripts with Pseudo-Abdias. And, much of what she has to say here is simply irrelevant to this article, since this article is about Pseudo-Abdias, not about how other distinct manuscripts influenced stained glass windows at Reims. I'm going to replace all this with a far simpler statement, which I feel is an accurate summary of what her book has to say about this topic, without going into excessive detail:
I also will remove this paragraph:
It is accurate, but it just seems rather arbitrary for us to pick out one event at random from this manuscript, just because a source happens to discuss it. (It is not arbitrary for Lilich, because it is significant in understanding one particular stained glass window at Reims, but while explaining every stained glass window at Reims is the point of her book, it is not the point of this article.) SJK ( talk) 12:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
References
This article was nominated for deletion on 26 September 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am going to remove these two paragraphs:
There is no problem with Lillich's book; the problem is that, if you actually read what she wrote, and compare it to the above summary of what she wrote (mostly the work of the now-banned User:Paul Bedson), you realise that the above is a rather distorted and confused recitation of what she has to say. For example, the first point, that Pseudo-Abdias was "copied" in Ancient Greek by St. Theodore and then translated into Latin by Anastasius Bibliothecarius – if you actually read what Lillich has to say, it is clear she is talking about a completely different book (p. 46):
Lilich is trying to explain why a particular stained glass image disagrees with the text of Pseudo-Abdias, and does so by citing completely different manuscripts. Bedson's text completely confuses those other manuscripts with Pseudo-Abdias. And, much of what she has to say here is simply irrelevant to this article, since this article is about Pseudo-Abdias, not about how other distinct manuscripts influenced stained glass windows at Reims. I'm going to replace all this with a far simpler statement, which I feel is an accurate summary of what her book has to say about this topic, without going into excessive detail:
I also will remove this paragraph:
It is accurate, but it just seems rather arbitrary for us to pick out one event at random from this manuscript, just because a source happens to discuss it. (It is not arbitrary for Lilich, because it is significant in understanding one particular stained glass window at Reims, but while explaining every stained glass window at Reims is the point of her book, it is not the point of this article.) SJK ( talk) 12:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
References