 | A fact from Frog Service appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 March 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copied from Johnbod talk edit
hello Johnbod
Thanks for creating Frog Service. An interesting and well-written article. Intially thought it was going to be some obscure 80s band id est Aztec Camera but was delighted by the content. Well done. Dorkinglad (talk) 12:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
I leave it for those that call themselves the official ones to provide a rating but a clear B from me.Dorkinglad (talk) 12:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
The word "service" edit
Can we add some clarification in the main body about the use of "service" here (presumably to mean "a set of dishes or utensils" per Wiktionary)? I had never before in my life seen "service" used this way. EpsilonCarinae (talk) 01:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, are you a native speaker? It is the common and inevitable word. Johnbod (talk) 01:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, I've spoken American English my entire life, although I suppose it makes sense that I had never heard this usage since all family meal gatherings (breakfast, lunch, dinner) are practically synonymous to me. EpsilonCarinae (talk) 01:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Well, we have a link, so I've added that. Johnbod (talk) 01:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- I think that's much better, thank you. EpsilonCarinae (talk) 01:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Well, we have a link, so I've added that. Johnbod (talk) 01:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, I've spoken American English my entire life, although I suppose it makes sense that I had never heard this usage since all family meal gatherings (breakfast, lunch, dinner) are practically synonymous to me. EpsilonCarinae (talk) 01:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Reptile edit
The quote used twice (once in photo caption, once in main text) calls the frog a reptile - it is not, it is an amphibian. As this is a quote and therefore can't be corrected, I have [sic] after 'reptile' in both quotes. The quote used in Did You Know should be altered as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.244.143 (talk) 07:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
.png)
- No doubt the quotation from the late 18th century was using the term "reptile" in the original sense of a low creeping creature, rather than the modern scientific sense of a member of the order Reptilia. In any event, at the time, what we would call amphibians and reptiles were grouped together by Linnaeus in his order Amphibia. Others, such as Laurenti, called this combined group Reptilia. The division of the herpetiles into two separate orders was only widely recognised in the 19th century.
- How many pieces were included in the service? Sources seem to differ, 944 or 952. How many are included in Wedgwood's catalogue? (And it seems some were made after the exhibition in June 1774.[1]) 213.205.198.245 (talk) 08:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Believe it or not "Llewellynn Frederick William Jewitt (or Llewellyn) (24 November 1816 – 5 June 1886) was a noted illustrator, engraver, natural scientist and author of The Ceramic Art of Great Britain (1878). His output was prodigious and covered a large range of interests." - my bold. Secretary of the Derbyshire Natural History Society or something. This work is 1865. A Wikipedia editor avant la lettre, clearly, in more ways than one. Yes the numbers are a tad at sea - someone has already altered them I'll look later, but there may be discrepancies between ordered, made & sent. Johnbod (talk) 11:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Jewitt, p.211, appear to be quoting something earlier, although he does not give a source. He should have known better by 1865 (cited in the article) than to describe a frog as a reptile, even in a quote, without comment, but there we are. Can we find the original? There must be something earlier - contempraneous to the service, i.e. late 18th century, was my supposition. But here is a similar usage from 1816.213.205.198.245 (talk) 11:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- His book used extensively the company/family papers, which is why it is so useful. No doubt these survive & some have been published. Probably the monograph would have more. He doesn't say that Wedgwood used "reptile". Johnbod (talk) 17:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- From reading Patrick O'Brian, it appears to me that the term "reptile" was an idiom of the time, applied in O'Brian's books to things like weevils - "that reptile lurking under the bread-barge" (I think that was how it went) and undesirable persons - "that odious reptile Kimber." Assuming we take O'Brian's period speech as authentic, it seems to have been rather broadly applied to things regarded as lower life forms. Acroterion (talk) 04:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Jewitt, p.211, appear to be quoting something earlier, although he does not give a source. He should have known better by 1865 (cited in the article) than to describe a frog as a reptile, even in a quote, without comment, but there we are. Can we find the original? There must be something earlier - contempraneous to the service, i.e. late 18th century, was my supposition. But here is a similar usage from 1816.213.205.198.245 (talk) 11:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Believe it or not "Llewellynn Frederick William Jewitt (or Llewellyn) (24 November 1816 – 5 June 1886) was a noted illustrator, engraver, natural scientist and author of The Ceramic Art of Great Britain (1878). His output was prodigious and covered a large range of interests." - my bold. Secretary of the Derbyshire Natural History Society or something. This work is 1865. A Wikipedia editor avant la lettre, clearly, in more ways than one. Yes the numbers are a tad at sea - someone has already altered them I'll look later, but there may be discrepancies between ordered, made & sent. Johnbod (talk) 11:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)