Misplaced Pages

Talk:Benjamin Mountfort: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 06:35, 3 August 2006 editGiano (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users20,173 edits Does nit need an ugly info box, and I doubt this is mid importence to New Zealanders, as he is one of their besy known architects← Previous edit Revision as of 22:43, 5 August 2006 edit undoKingbotk (talk | contribs)447,274 edits Template replacement, Replaced: {{BioWikiProject → {{WPBiography,Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{featured}} {{featured}}
{{WPCD-People}} {{WPCD-People}}
{{BioWikiProject|class=FA|importance=Mid}} {{WPBiography|class=FA|importance=Mid}}
{{Mainpage date|June 6|2005}} {{Mainpage date|June 6|2005}}
Just read the article... its brilliant! Just read the article... its brilliant!

Revision as of 22:43, 5 August 2006

Template:Featured article is only for Misplaced Pages:Featured articles. Template:WPCD-People

WikiProject iconBiography FA‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Template:Mainpage date Just read the article... its brilliant!

DiamondVertex 07:32, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Nice to know you think so. Thanks Giano 09:04, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I also find it well-written and illuminating. One thing that could improve it: colour, up-to-date photographs of the man's works. That's my only suggestion to boost this excellent article. Radagast 04:22, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words, regarding the images when I started to write this I would have agreed with you, I only used the Victorian black and white photographs as they were the only ones I could find out of copyright. Having now stared at them for the three weeks or so I was writing this, I now think they add a certain nostalgia and originality to the page, they also have a certain clean clarity that new ones may not have, especially as many of the buildings are now in heavily developed areas. However I suppose this is a modern encyclopedia, and that is not a very encyclopedic view, and colour would brighten the page up, but in the meantime I quite like the old ones. Giano 15:22, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it's true that the monochrome imagery adds something of a general theme to the article; however, I like to appreciate all aspects of a structure when it comes to architecture, and a crisp colour image or two would make a lot of difference, IMO. Radagast 17:13, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
Categories: