 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Ugo Spirito edit
The section "Ugo Spirito" contains one complete sentence followed by five non-sentences. Is it mistranslated from Italian, or what? —Tamfang (talk) 06:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- I read that as a vote to delete that section? Anyone want to fix or defend it before I do so? I don't see much mention of work in economics in the article on Ugo Spirito.Jbening (talk) 02:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
- If it can be translated out of gibberish, it should stay. I'm not competent to do so. —Tamfang (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- Let me know if it is improved or what sentence fragments are still bewildering. General sweeping romanticized political verbage is not only a style of that genre of political propaganda, but also of their political philosophy intrinsically.
- If it can be translated out of gibberish, it should stay. I'm not competent to do so. —Tamfang (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- It's hard to specify a concept generally from it, without falsifying their abstract (as in 'universally encompassing') meaning about it. (in their words doing what would be "intellectualizing it." When today in the English speaking world what they're doing about it is what we'd rather call "intellectualizing"). This is a large part of the reason it has been so easily misunderstood so often; because the crux of it has been completely not understood in the least, leaving periphery aspects of their theories to have been falsely taken as the core to them. Nagelfar (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- It seems that one of the main purposes of Wikipedia is "intellectualizing" human thought. The collaborative effort here is designed to minimize any misunderstandings. If the claim is that the information is unparsable, then I vote for deletion. MBWikiguy (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.3.61.81 (talk)
Were someone able to refer to the source for Ugo Spirito from the English A. James Gregor work[1] there seems to be a great depth missing from the article as it has been left at it's current stage of development for many years. When there is much, by contrast, said of the subject published in English such as the above. I personally do not see any more clarity in what now has been kept from what had been removed when there was an Ugo Spirito section. Nagelfar (talk)`
References
- ^ Gregor, A. Mussolini's Intellectuals: Fascist Social and Political Thought. pg. 126 - 127, Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-2634-6