Talk:Alchemy: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
(an alternative alchemy) |
m (spelling) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit. |
With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit. |
||
--[[User:Yevaul|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST) |
--[[User:Yevaul|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST) |
||
* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[ |
* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[renaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the [[romanticism|Romantic]] view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST) |
||
Revision as of 13:42, 3 March 2006
With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit. --Yevaul 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
- Granted that topics like alchemy may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had many authors. Such is the way of the wiki. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what medieval or renaissance alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the Romantic view of a period alchemist. - Cian Gillebhrath 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
