This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2020 and 12 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Amanda Reece.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 04:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I really don't think the long poem is needed, among other things with this article. The external links are borderline spam. 205.157.110.11 22:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
LOL, the poem is so incredible that you do not want to post it because it triggers your control programming. Either that or you are a paid disinfo agent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.162.4.7 ( talk) 23:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
The connection made in this image is by Harrison 1881, if anyone fancies working that into the article. cygnis insignis 17:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Why is the long quote from her "prophecies" stated to be "published in 1448", when in fact , as previously stated, these well-known predictions are considered to be much later forgeries. Is that because they were originally claimed to have been published then? Either way, it seems a bit confusing. Orlando098 ( talk) 09:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
>Quoting the article: " There is a moth, Callistege mi, named after her. It seemingly bears a profile of a hag's head on each wing." <
> How is it named after her? Explain that! I see nothing of her name in the above Linnean binomial. I see the hag's head in the photograph--related to the description of her appearance as ugly. But we need an English translation of the Latin name of the moth, if indeed it has anything to do with Mother Shipton. <
>Thank you. -r < 69.166.29.43 ( talk) 13:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The overall tone of this page is very credulous about Shipton's prophecies and makes many claims (even supern/atural ones) without sources.
Although the page's intoduction mentions that the first publication of her prophecies "contained numerous mainly regional predictions and only two prophetic verses", much of the article presents prohecies as fact, giving specific explanations for these prophecies. It does not even make it clear that these prophecies were actually made by Shipton. There is no account of where and when they were published.
The prophecies section simply lists examples of what it claims were her prophecies (with no indicaiton of where and when they were published) and then gives one interpretation of each prophecy as if it were fact. The explanations also make assumptions about ways to interpret these prophecies. Example:
"Often when Mother Shipton would have visions of specific people she wouldn't see faces or names, but their family heraldry. "
Really? Says who?
It includes the odd sentence "Not long after Mother Shipton uttered this prophecy did a huge storm fall on York.". No date or source is given, and if the earliest prophecies attributed to her were published 80 years after her death, how do we know what happened "not long after" she "uttered" this prophecy? Or even that she "uttered" this prophecy.
I am not sufficiently knowlegable about Shipton to suggest specifically how to change this article. However, at the very least, sources should be given and specific interepetaitons of prophecies should be removed, or spelled out as being *examples* of how prophecies of this type might be interpreted. But ultimately, it would be good to get some clarity on whether these cited prophecies are from the "original" published prophecies (80 years after her death) or are even later claims.
Rg9320 25 June 2021
The cow mentioned represents the heraldry of Henry VIII: uh, why? Henry VIII's emblems were the Tudor rose and the Beaufort portcullis. I can't find any evidence that he was ever represented heraldically as a cow.
the bull similarly represents Anne Boleyn: okay, the bull's head did at least represent the Boleyn family, but Anne Boleyn's own arms granted after her marriage to Henry didn't include this – they instead used the Butler arms that her father got the rights to when he was made Earl of Wiltshire on her marriage.
In her prophecy Mother Shipton refers to him as a "mitered peacock" as he came from the lowly state of being the son of a butcher to controlling and guiding King Henry VIII and all his policies for Englandunclear why Wolsey should be a peacock. None of the three animals on his coat of arms ( choughs, leopards, and a lion) are a peacock. Peacocks don't have any association with butchers and aren't usually considered lowly animals. More generally, it's unclear why Wolsey features in this at all – Anne Boleyn's rise is his fall from grace, and the Dissolution of the Monasteries doesn't start until several years after Wolsey's death! Wolsey was a good Catholic – he wasn't guiding Henry VIII to dissolve the monasteries!
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2020 and 12 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Amanda Reece.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 04:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I really don't think the long poem is needed, among other things with this article. The external links are borderline spam. 205.157.110.11 22:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
LOL, the poem is so incredible that you do not want to post it because it triggers your control programming. Either that or you are a paid disinfo agent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.162.4.7 ( talk) 23:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
The connection made in this image is by Harrison 1881, if anyone fancies working that into the article. cygnis insignis 17:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Why is the long quote from her "prophecies" stated to be "published in 1448", when in fact , as previously stated, these well-known predictions are considered to be much later forgeries. Is that because they were originally claimed to have been published then? Either way, it seems a bit confusing. Orlando098 ( talk) 09:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
>Quoting the article: " There is a moth, Callistege mi, named after her. It seemingly bears a profile of a hag's head on each wing." <
> How is it named after her? Explain that! I see nothing of her name in the above Linnean binomial. I see the hag's head in the photograph--related to the description of her appearance as ugly. But we need an English translation of the Latin name of the moth, if indeed it has anything to do with Mother Shipton. <
>Thank you. -r < 69.166.29.43 ( talk) 13:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The overall tone of this page is very credulous about Shipton's prophecies and makes many claims (even supern/atural ones) without sources.
Although the page's intoduction mentions that the first publication of her prophecies "contained numerous mainly regional predictions and only two prophetic verses", much of the article presents prohecies as fact, giving specific explanations for these prophecies. It does not even make it clear that these prophecies were actually made by Shipton. There is no account of where and when they were published.
The prophecies section simply lists examples of what it claims were her prophecies (with no indicaiton of where and when they were published) and then gives one interpretation of each prophecy as if it were fact. The explanations also make assumptions about ways to interpret these prophecies. Example:
"Often when Mother Shipton would have visions of specific people she wouldn't see faces or names, but their family heraldry. "
Really? Says who?
It includes the odd sentence "Not long after Mother Shipton uttered this prophecy did a huge storm fall on York.". No date or source is given, and if the earliest prophecies attributed to her were published 80 years after her death, how do we know what happened "not long after" she "uttered" this prophecy? Or even that she "uttered" this prophecy.
I am not sufficiently knowlegable about Shipton to suggest specifically how to change this article. However, at the very least, sources should be given and specific interepetaitons of prophecies should be removed, or spelled out as being *examples* of how prophecies of this type might be interpreted. But ultimately, it would be good to get some clarity on whether these cited prophecies are from the "original" published prophecies (80 years after her death) or are even later claims.
Rg9320 25 June 2021
The cow mentioned represents the heraldry of Henry VIII: uh, why? Henry VIII's emblems were the Tudor rose and the Beaufort portcullis. I can't find any evidence that he was ever represented heraldically as a cow.
the bull similarly represents Anne Boleyn: okay, the bull's head did at least represent the Boleyn family, but Anne Boleyn's own arms granted after her marriage to Henry didn't include this – they instead used the Butler arms that her father got the rights to when he was made Earl of Wiltshire on her marriage.
In her prophecy Mother Shipton refers to him as a "mitered peacock" as he came from the lowly state of being the son of a butcher to controlling and guiding King Henry VIII and all his policies for Englandunclear why Wolsey should be a peacock. None of the three animals on his coat of arms ( choughs, leopards, and a lion) are a peacock. Peacocks don't have any association with butchers and aren't usually considered lowly animals. More generally, it's unclear why Wolsey features in this at all – Anne Boleyn's rise is his fall from grace, and the Dissolution of the Monasteries doesn't start until several years after Wolsey's death! Wolsey was a good Catholic – he wasn't guiding Henry VIII to dissolve the monasteries!