Talk:Sir Thomas Browne on America

This article so styled, Sir Thomas Browne on America, is not appropriate for wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of essays. An article such as Thomas Browne is appropriate and this article needs to redirect to it. Some of his notable musings on America could be summed up in that article. B 17:36, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)

Not appropiate = I object to. i would have thought Americans would be interested in early perceptions of their nation, but apparently here's someone who does not wish to learn about his own countries history, geography or development, how v. tiresomesome to explain to the prejudiced this all is Norwikian 02:43, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Norwikian, your counter-argument is a straw man; Browne's notable musings can be detailed on the article styled in his name: Thomas Browne. Browne is not the best nor necessarily even a good authority on early or modern America. You've already been warned about not making personal attacks. Keep the discussion relevant please. B 15:19, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)

Please point me in the direction of other 17th century European Encyclopaedists who wrote of America. Norwikian 11:03, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

It Doesn't matter whether there is another or not...it's not relevant. B 22:50, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

In other words you really don't know of any other European writer on 17th c. America, thus your objection is irrelevant and not relevant once more = i personally don't like, highly subjective criteria indeed to VfD In the absence of other 17th . writers just how exactly do you know whether Browne is the best or a good authority on America or not, except other than via received information?? I am contributing to the Wiki SOURCE material here which has never before been collated because because because.... to repeat Sir T.B.'s writings ARE the very earliest of all Europeans writing's on America. This alone makes it suitable for an an encyclopaedia, but I do agree that it does not need to have a seperate entry, so just to placate your tenuous objections i have now placed it as a sub-section under T.B biography. As for your proposed VfD on the Library you were long ago out-voted on this matter please read and understand the Archive discussion. Norwikian 07:02, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

From VfD

• Sir Thomas Browne on America - his musings on America, not an encyclopedia article. B 17:41, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC). Also check out Library of Sir Thomas Browne both authored by Norwikian. B 17:44, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)
  • Keep this one. Why should it be deleted? RickK 20:36, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • RickK, an article titled "Library of [person]" is not an appropriate model for wikipedia. There is no need to separate out the writings or opinions of an person separate from the article on that person. B 15:14, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)
  • No particular reason for either of these to be deleted other than the proposer for VfD is a Europhobe, who cannot get his head round anything which originates outside of U.S.A. besides i notice that other U.S.A. encyclo's have incorporated several other of my articles on Sir T.B. so too late dear boy, like when in doubt in one's comprehension just delete, delete, delete, the final solution is to delete, delete !!Besides the article Sir Thomas Browne on America has been around on the Wiki for 3 months now since October 11 . It is only since User :B has had an ideological objection and clash that B. has deemed it fit to nominate it for deletion, less out of concern for the integrity of the contents of Wiki than out of petty prejudice I fear. Norwikian 02:21, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Vote to keep Pollinator 03:34, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • User b's talk-page heading entitled 'Norwikian's condescending European prattle' indicates non-justification of either pages being deleted Norwikian 03:58, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • My vote is to shorten "America" and merge it into "Browne", because it's short; and to merge the bio information from "Library" into "Browne", cut the encomium, and keep "Library". Tualha 06:54, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Seconded. Merge, then delete all encomium. BTW, Norwikian, you've already been warned about not making personal attacks. Keep the discussion relevant please. B 15:14, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)
  • This whole absurd travesty began from my unsolicited criticism of American Defense department. This in turn has now sparked these 2 proposed VfD's. Library has already been voted to keep, months ago, so it is rather tiresome to restate reasons why it has kept. Check out the archive discussion here.

I do agree that 'On America' may not be too relevant for the wiki but i've seen obscurer. I am beginning to suspect that it may just be the actual TEXT of what Sir T.B. is 'prophecising' which may be causing some upset i.e. on America and its future foreign policy. Delete, edit, merge, do whatever you like to your hearts contents boys it is absolutely of no consequence whatsoever to me. I can always publish elsewhere on the web. Truth and plain old historical fact will out in the end, it can't be suppressed by these highly subjective reasons for proposing a VfD . "Dare we suggest it? The Kingdom of Browne is one which the intellectual snob cannot enter " (O'Geary '55)Norwikian 19:23, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Norwikian, I have not read the article in question, nor have I read any of the articles to which you have contributed (as best as I can tell looking at your contributions list). My sole exposure to you is here on the VFD list. The attitude that you display here is very abrasive. I don't know anything about your contributions -- they may be brilliant. But I do know that, based on what I read here, based on what I read here, I have no desire at all to work with you. This is supposed to be a community of people working together - yes, disagreeing sometimes, but working together still. Please try to work with us, not in spite of us. -Anthropos 00:25, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Er, please excuse me, but like what exactly does the close proximity of the statements- 'based on what I read here, I have no desire at all to work with you' followed by 'Please try to work with us' signify ??Norwikian 10:48, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Off-topic conversation continues at Anthropos/talk.

I do not understand why this article is on VFD. It seems like a useful history article. mydogategodshat 02:56, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)