Talk:Alchemy: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
(New Article) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
* 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) |
* 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) |
||
* Well, that answered my question as to how the articles are written. Thanks, I'll do my best to articulate what I know, as I study the subject, but am far from being a scholar of any sort.--[[User:Yevaul|Yevaul]] 18:58, 5 Mar 2006 (CST) |
* Well, that answered my question as to how the articles are written. Thanks, I'll do my best to articulate what I know, as I study the subject, but am far from being a scholar of any sort.--[[User:Yevaul|Yevaul]] 18:58, 5 Mar 2006 (CST) |
||
== New Article == |
|||
Hello, fellow SCA enthusiasts! |
|||
This article is presently under construction by yours truly, and will progress in stages. So, that being said, please be patient and understand that if something seems incomplete, it most probably is. |
|||
Thank you! |
|||
--[[User:Yevaul|Yevaul]] 13:22, 28 Apr 2006 (EST) |
|||
Latest revision as of 13:22, 28 April 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)
- Well, that answered my question as to how the articles are written. Thanks, I'll do my best to articulate what I know, as I study the subject, but am far from being a scholar of any sort.--Yevaul 18:58, 5 Mar 2006 (CST)
New Article
Hello, fellow SCA enthusiasts!
This article is presently under construction by yours truly, and will progress in stages. So, that being said, please be patient and understand that if something seems incomplete, it most probably is.
Thank you! --Yevaul 13:22, 28 Apr 2006 (EST)
