Talk:The Devonshire Manuscript

Shall we discuss requesting an import of our contributor biographies from Wikipedia? Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 20:11, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If you are copying content from WP, then you are required to include the edit histories. This can be done by pasting it into the talk page (not recommended), or by requesting an import.  I'd be happy to import the content for you. --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 20:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Jomegat thank you for the offer. We are at sixes and sevens about whether to import the biographies, or simply linking to them in Wikipedia.  The first option seems more booklike, but it would be a pity to have the revisions that folks make to the imports not show up in Wikipedia (or to have their revisions update the versions imported here).  Which of the two options (importing vs linking) is best Wikibooks practice? Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 22:11, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Commonly if the subject matter is relevant to the subject being covered, then an import is in order since the objective is to produce books that may or may not be used with a live network connected or even end up in pint, the first option does not exclude the possibility in including a mention that Wikipedia may have an article and provide a link for it, even if I personally dislike the larger graphic template for that, there are many ways of presenting it. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 22:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I like the idea of linking out to Wikipedia. I've put up some brief biographies, with sections about each person's contribution to the DMS, since the Wikipedia entries for famous contributors (like Wyatt and Boleyn) seem much too long to include here. I would love your thoughts as I experiment with the graphic template for pointing to Wikipedia articles.  After that, the next step is revising the citations so that they conform with wiki format.    Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 20:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Survey
The Devonshire Manuscript Editorial Group is trying to understand just what makes a good editable scholarly edition. We would love to get your feedback on the evolving edition of the Devonshire Manuscript. If you have ten minutes to spare please fill out our survey. Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 20:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Contributors
To see a visualization of editor contributions to this page, click here. Cultures4 (discuss • contribs) 16:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

introduction

 * The first sentence of this book is "Despite growing scholarly interest in the Devonshire Manuscript&hellip;" without any explanation to lay readers as to what the Devonshire manuscript is. I have never heard of Devonshire before, so I had to go to Wikipedia to find out.  The introduction should have an explanation as to what the manuscript is and why it is important enough to have its own book analyzing it.  Nicole Sharp (discuss • contribs) 19:55, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have gone ahead and copied the (stub) Wikipedia article as a first introductory paragraph for this book, which provides a short background and context for the study of the manuscript. Nicole Sharp (discuss • contribs) 20:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)