This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Home LivingWikipedia:WikiProject Home LivingTemplate:WikiProject Home Livinghome
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
This seems to be a straightforward cut and paste from an 1877 magazine article. It moves on to cover the English rococo. It might be difficult to revise this text to bring it up to modern historical views.--Wetman (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's not so straightforward; it was less encyclopedic in original form. It passes through the Rococo on the way to the Elizabethan revival, and shifting the Rococo details to more obvious places is one of the needed changes. I've encountered a tangle of material in related articles and am trying to weave them together; as you point out the Rococo article is part of the tangle. Wikipedia has a motley coverage of this field, although I can't decide which meanings of motley are more appropriate. -- SEWilco (talk) 04:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least you're trying. Until then, I'd suggest, perhaps revising the title of the article, if that sort of thing is done. As it reads, it seems to have as much or more to do with Jacobean and post than Elizabethan. I keep screeching to a halt while reading thinking "what the heck has Charles II got to do with this?" DelCavallo (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
