Talk:Blackwork

History

I have moved the reference to Wace to the References section and deleted the internal User link in keeping with Wikipedia's MOS.

Catherine of Aragon in 1502 with a tiny row of blackwork on her smock.

I have also deleted this information:

Also, Catherine's public wedding was in 1501 - and blackwork did not really take off in England til the 1530s. Her marriage to King Henry VIII was a private affair, so even if she had worn blackwork then, few would have seen it in the flesh. However, the legend still persists, although no evidence to support the theory has been found to date. A favourite motif on her clothing was the pomegranate which was used as a heraldic device in Granada, where Catherine lived as a child.

The first assertion is irrelevant; Catherine did marry Henry's older brother Prince Arthur in 1501, but everyone around the court would have been familiar with Catherine's wardrobe.

The second assertion, concerning the pomegranate, which has been in this article since I first ran across it, is, I think, an interpretaton from my own website http://www.blackworkarchives.com/bw_pome.html, and while what is said there is true, I have found no evidence of pomegranates ever being embroidered on any clothing of Catherine's. I have been meaning to clarify this for some time. - PKM 21:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Readability of Article

I have recommended the Wikipedia website to my students, who are aged 16-19, for research purposes, however they have struggled to understand some of the articles. This is mainly due to the complexity of the language used. The readability score of the article is 11.27, which is the years of education needed to be able to understand this article on first reading. The article could be improved by reducing the length of the sentences, reducing the length of the paragraphs and replacing difficult words with more commonly used ones which would make the article more accessible to a wider and perhaps younger audience. Would any of the editors be prepared to review the article to make it easier to read and thus more accessible to more users? Sarahhcfe 14:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

There's a special version of wikipedia written for those whose grasp of english is shaky. The articles are much easier to read, relying on simple vocabulary and grammatical constructs. Go to "simple.wikipedia.org". yandman 17:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, there are no articles on embroidery at all in simple.wikipedia.org.

As one of the editors of this article, I will make some attempt to simplify the vocabulary (certainly "work" or "stitch" is better than "execute" in many cases) and sentence structure. Do let me know if this helps. - PKM 21:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I have simplified some of the language and cleaned things up a a bit. I have not removed words like "austere" which were added by other editors and which contribute to the flavor of the article. At least one of the editors is British, and I am a Californian, so some of the varitation in style may be due to that. - PKM 21:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

This has been my biggest pet peeve here at Wikipedia. Many articles are so top-heavy with jargon and erudition, that they topple over of their own accord:

• "Plain Language For Everyone, Even Experts" - https://www.nngroup.com/videos/plain-language-for-experts/
• "Provide context for the reader (WP:AUDIENCE) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Provide_context_for_the_reader

Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 08:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Article merge?

Greetings,

These two articles are closely, tightly related and essentially cover the same topic and should be merged, in my opinion. They even share at least 4 illustrative examples. Does anyone know how to merge articles and then to knit them together to be clearly understood?

• Blackwork / Spanish blackwork - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwork

• Holbein stitch - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holbein_stitch

I am posting this identical comment in both talk pages.

Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 17:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Nobody? Anybody?

Wordreader (talk) 18:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)