Discussão:Quote mining examples - Histórico de revisões

RogerNicholson: moved Talk:Quote mining, selective quotation, and distortion to Talk:Quote mining examples

2009-12-07T14:22:24Z

moved Talk:Quote mining, selective quotation, and distortion to Talk:Quote mining examples

← Revisão anterior	Revisão das 14h22min de 7 de dezembro de 2009
(Sem diferenças)

MikeClark em 18h19min de 23 de julho de 2006

2006-07-23T18:19:33Z

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 18h19min de 23 de julho de 2006
Linha 1:		Linha 1:
	I guess I have to take a little exception to the premise here: "...Or that education, book reading, and scholarship were higher in Palmyra than London? Can anyone take this assertion seriously?" My understanding of the literacy rate in the United States in comparison to the literacy rate in England, at this time in history, is that the vast majority of white Americans were literate, while in England this was nowhere near the case. Before printers became more common in English America, a large part of the trade between England and America was, in fact, books. The notion that there was a larger proportion of people in Palmyra who not only read, but also owned books, than in London, is not at all unlikely. Of course, the sheer number of book-owning people in London definitely exceeded the population of Palmyra and its surrounds, but as to literacy rate Palmyra would have had London beat all around. It is always a mistake to simply assume that because something might be true today that it was true a hundred and fifty years ago. And consider that in little Podunk Palmyra there was a printer who could print major books! That was the case because there was a ''local market'' for the product of E. B. Grandin's press; Palmyra was not full of ignorant, unlettered, country bumpkins. Well, maybe there were a lot of country bumpkins, but in contrast to Mother England at the time, almost all ''our'' country bumpkins could read. [[User:MikeClark\|Mike Clark]] 14:50, 6 Nov 2005 (EST)		I guess I have to take a little exception to the premise here: "...Or that education, book reading, and scholarship were higher in Palmyra than London? Can anyone take this assertion seriously?" My understanding of the literacy rate in the United States in comparison to the literacy rate in England, at this time in history, is that the vast majority of white Americans were literate, while in England this was nowhere near the case. Before printers became more common in English America, a large part of the trade between England and America was, in fact, books. The notion that there was a larger proportion of people in Palmyra who not only read, but also owned books, than in London, is not at all unlikely. Of course, the sheer number of book-owning people in London definitely exceeded the population of Palmyra and its surrounds, but as to literacy rate Palmyra would have had London beat all around. It is always a mistake to simply assume that because something might be true today that it was true a hundred and fifty years ago. And consider that in little Podunk Palmyra there was a printer who could print major books! That was the case because there was a ''local market'' for the product of E. B. Grandin's press; Palmyra was not full of ignorant, unlettered, country bumpkins. Well, maybe there were a lot of country bumpkins, but in contrast to Mother England at the time, almost all ''our'' country bumpkins could read. [[User:MikeClark\|Mike Clark]] 14:50, 6 Nov 2005 (EST)

			Does anyone actually read these Talk pages? No response to the above. Hmmm. Completely changing the topic to a little problem with </table> tags appearing in the article. I copied the text where this is occurring over to an html editor and it turns out that the html tables are correctly formed, so that is not the problem. I think the problem rests with how MediaWiki handles embedded html. It would probably be best for us to start using MediaWiki table notation instead of trying to embed html tables. [[User:MikeClark\|Mike Clark]] 12:19, 23 Jul 2006 (MDT)

MikeClark em 19h50min de 6 de novembro de 2005

2005-11-06T19:50:32Z

Página nova

I guess I have to take a little exception to the premise here: "...Or that education, book reading, and scholarship were higher in Palmyra than London? Can anyone take this assertion seriously?" My understanding of the literacy rate in the United States in comparison to the literacy rate in England, at this time in history, is that the vast majority of white Americans were literate, while in England this was nowhere near the case. Before printers became more common in English America, a large part of the trade between England and America was, in fact, books. The notion that there was a larger proportion of people in Palmyra who not only read, but also owned books, than in London, is not at all unlikely. Of course, the sheer number of book-owning people in London definitely exceeded the population of Palmyra and its surrounds, but as to literacy rate Palmyra would have had London beat all around. It is always a mistake to simply assume that because something might be true today that it was true a hundred and fifty years ago. And consider that in little Podunk Palmyra there was a printer who could print major books! That was the case because there was a ''local market'' for the product of E. B. Grandin's press; Palmyra was not full of ignorant, unlettered, country bumpkins. Well, maybe there were a lot of country bumpkins, but in contrast to Mother England at the time, almost all ''our'' country bumpkins could read. [[User:MikeClark|Mike Clark]] 14:50, 6 Nov 2005 (EST)