![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the section describing te Lady of Shalott, the open roundel is referred to as a "window" when it is in fact a mirror. As the poem states, "the mirror cracked from side to side...." The crack is visible if you examine the painting closely.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.131.94 ( talk • contribs)
When the German queen of Romania, the excellent and admirable Elisabeth von Wied, has herself photographed in Romanian national dress, of course this is "cultural propaganda". To deny it, saying that "royalty usually adopted national dress", and that even to notice this blatant example of cultural propaganda violates a neutral point-of-view, is somewhat outside the mainstream of an ordinary culturally-educated response to this very interesting image. When the Windsors are photographed in kilts at Balmoral during World War I, this is also cultural propanganda, is it not? it would be equally foolish to deny it. To delete it is a form of censorship that scarcely offers an reputable example of a neutral point of view. Now, I suppose we may expect to see one of those disreputable "disputed" tags pasted across this article? -- Wetman 07:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Propaganda is not necessarily a negative word. As far as I see it, basically:
Perhaps Wetman has some other explanation, but I think the caption works quite well. - FrancisTyers 08:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Sorry! I should have assumed good faith, but often when people come to criticise articles such as these. I got caught again earlier today. My apologies :) PS. I seem to remember fuzzypeg was a hedgehog when I was a kid. The books were ^____^ is that where you got the name? - FrancisTyers 23:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't see any discussion here relating to this tag, and reading through the article I could see only one sentence that raised possible alarm bells (after the cultural propaganda mention was removed): that of the male weavers possibly usurping the female role. So I have removed the {{originalresearch}} tag. If anyone wants to put it back, please leave an explanatory comment here. If you only disagree with small sections of the article, then it would be more appropriate to employ the {{fact}} tag (placed after the offending sentence or clause). Fuzzypeg 14:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
How much are spinning and weaving related? They seem to go hand in hand in mythology. More can be done with the German section I started, if anyone has time. I think Mother Goose stems from Holda and/or Perchta (through the name "goose-footed Bertha") but need to remember my source before mentioning that. Goldenrowley 17:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
In this article (Textiles in folklore) it states...
In Germanic mythology, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta (Frau Perchta, Berchta, Bertha) were both known as goddesses who oversaw spinning and weaving. They had many names.
In this other article (Frau Holle) it states...
Frau Holle (also known in various regions as Holla, Holda, Perchta, Berchta, Berta, or Bertha) was initially a pre-Christian female legendary figure who survived in popular belief well into the 19th century.
Thus, according to the Frau Holle article, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta are two names of the same goddess.
So, which article has it correct?
Thibeinn ( talk) 21:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
In this article (Textiles in folklore... /info/en/?search=Textiles_in_folklore ) it states:
In Germanic mythology, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta (Frau Perchta, Berchta, Bertha) were both known as goddesses who oversaw spinning and weaving. They had many names.
In this other article (Frau Holle... /info/en/?search=Frau_Holle ) it states:
Frau Holle (also known in various regions as Holla, Holda, Perchta, Berchta, Berta, or Bertha) was initially a pre-Christian female legendary figure who survived in popular belief well into the 19th century.
Thus, according to the Frau Holle article, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta are two names of the same female legendary figure / goddess.
So, which article has it correct?
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the section describing te Lady of Shalott, the open roundel is referred to as a "window" when it is in fact a mirror. As the poem states, "the mirror cracked from side to side...." The crack is visible if you examine the painting closely.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.131.94 ( talk • contribs)
When the German queen of Romania, the excellent and admirable Elisabeth von Wied, has herself photographed in Romanian national dress, of course this is "cultural propaganda". To deny it, saying that "royalty usually adopted national dress", and that even to notice this blatant example of cultural propaganda violates a neutral point-of-view, is somewhat outside the mainstream of an ordinary culturally-educated response to this very interesting image. When the Windsors are photographed in kilts at Balmoral during World War I, this is also cultural propanganda, is it not? it would be equally foolish to deny it. To delete it is a form of censorship that scarcely offers an reputable example of a neutral point of view. Now, I suppose we may expect to see one of those disreputable "disputed" tags pasted across this article? -- Wetman 07:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Propaganda is not necessarily a negative word. As far as I see it, basically:
Perhaps Wetman has some other explanation, but I think the caption works quite well. - FrancisTyers 08:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Sorry! I should have assumed good faith, but often when people come to criticise articles such as these. I got caught again earlier today. My apologies :) PS. I seem to remember fuzzypeg was a hedgehog when I was a kid. The books were ^____^ is that where you got the name? - FrancisTyers 23:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't see any discussion here relating to this tag, and reading through the article I could see only one sentence that raised possible alarm bells (after the cultural propaganda mention was removed): that of the male weavers possibly usurping the female role. So I have removed the {{originalresearch}} tag. If anyone wants to put it back, please leave an explanatory comment here. If you only disagree with small sections of the article, then it would be more appropriate to employ the {{fact}} tag (placed after the offending sentence or clause). Fuzzypeg 14:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
How much are spinning and weaving related? They seem to go hand in hand in mythology. More can be done with the German section I started, if anyone has time. I think Mother Goose stems from Holda and/or Perchta (through the name "goose-footed Bertha") but need to remember my source before mentioning that. Goldenrowley 17:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
In this article (Textiles in folklore) it states...
In Germanic mythology, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta (Frau Perchta, Berchta, Bertha) were both known as goddesses who oversaw spinning and weaving. They had many names.
In this other article (Frau Holle) it states...
Frau Holle (also known in various regions as Holla, Holda, Perchta, Berchta, Berta, or Bertha) was initially a pre-Christian female legendary figure who survived in popular belief well into the 19th century.
Thus, according to the Frau Holle article, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta are two names of the same goddess.
So, which article has it correct?
Thibeinn ( talk) 21:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
In this article (Textiles in folklore... /info/en/?search=Textiles_in_folklore ) it states:
In Germanic mythology, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta (Frau Perchta, Berchta, Bertha) were both known as goddesses who oversaw spinning and weaving. They had many names.
In this other article (Frau Holle... /info/en/?search=Frau_Holle ) it states:
Frau Holle (also known in various regions as Holla, Holda, Perchta, Berchta, Berta, or Bertha) was initially a pre-Christian female legendary figure who survived in popular belief well into the 19th century.
Thus, according to the Frau Holle article, Holda (Frau Holle) and Perchta are two names of the same female legendary figure / goddess.
So, which article has it correct?