Talk:Antonie Brentano

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Alphaten in topic Immortal Beloved theory refuted?

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Antonie Brentano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Immortal Beloved theory refuted? edit

The section that claims the immortal beloved theory was "only recently refuted" [when? where? by whom?] lacks any citation and seems to be original research. There is no citation and no evidence that any musicologist accepts this alleged refutation. I am unable to find any beyond what was added to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.5.208.9 (talkcontribs) 19:28, 25 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. These paragraphs are obviously either 'original research' or faulty interpretation of bona-fide research, couched in execrable English, lacking citations, and IMHO do not belong in this article at all. If no one objects within the next 5 days, I will take the liberty of removing the offending material. Awaiting input. -- Alphaten (talk) 17:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)Reply