Talk:Confucius - Revision history

Root at 17:32, 4 March 2013

2013-03-04T17:32:03Z

Ignatius J Reilly: /* New comments in Spring 2013 */

2013-03-01T20:56:42Z

New comments in Spring 2013

Samantha S at 02:24, 1 March 2013

2013-03-01T02:24:22Z

Leo1299 at 02:14, 1 March 2013

2013-03-01T02:14:47Z

Dr who at 20:05, 28 February 2013

2013-02-28T20:05:22Z

Ratu at 15:37, 28 February 2013

2013-02-28T15:37:40Z

TaraDFroisland: /* New comments in Spring 2013 */

2013-02-28T01:46:24Z

New comments in Spring 2013

Oprah wind fury: /* New comments in Spring 2013 */

2013-02-27T23:10:26Z

New comments in Spring 2013

Root: /* New comments in Spring 2013 */

2013-02-27T21:02:47Z

New comments in Spring 2013

Anonymous5: /* Comment 4 */

2013-02-27T20:13:41Z

Comment 4

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 =New comments in Spring 2013=
 Dear Tara and Loren, you write this article together. Please contact each other and work well together. Loren is more concentrating on the historical part and Tara more on the literary aspect of Confucius. [[User:Root|Root]] ([[User talk:Root|talk]]) 19:55, 26 February 2013 (CET)
@@ Line 12: / Line 10: @@
 *These are just a few ideas I had when I looked at your revised presentation.
 *There are also some pictures, who are not visible in my version of your ppt. It looks like you embedded them with Quicktime, but not everybody has it. So you may want to send me the pictures one by one and I can help you to input them in the presentation again the normal way (in Powerpoint using "Insert" "Graphic").[[User:Root|Root]] ([[User talk:Root|talk]]) 22:13, 19 February 2013 (CET)
 I like that you have as many sources as you do, it makes the article more credible. I would do some more proof reading to make sure the wording is more coherent.[[User:Oprah wind fury|Oprah wind fury]] ([[User talk:Oprah wind fury|talk]]) 15:09, 27 February 2013 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:56, 1 March 2013
Line 25:		Line 25:

	Loren- I think considering there is so much about Confucius that is uncertain that you've done a good job! [[User:Leo1299\|Leo1299]] ([[User talk:Leo1299\|talk]]) 03:14, 1 March 2013 (CET)		Loren- I think considering there is so much about Confucius that is uncertain that you've done a good job! [[User:Leo1299\|Leo1299]] ([[User talk:Leo1299\|talk]]) 03:14, 1 March 2013 (CET)
		+
		+	Tara - This looks amazing! Great information and nice use of pictures. [[User:Ignatius J Reilly\|Ignatius J Reilly]] ([[User talk:Ignatius J Reilly\|talk]]) 21:56, 1 March 2013 (CET)

	=old comments=		=old comments=

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:24, 1 March 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=New comments in Spring 2013=		=New comments in Spring 2013=
		+	Tara! incredibly long and thorough article. I can tell where you put most of your information because it deals with literature more directly than the historical content. I think the flow between the two aspects is pretty good. I do feel like there are a few too many pictures where some may not be needed. They seem a bit redundant and unnecessary. But the pictures are fun to look at...so if you wanted to still include them maybe create an external link with more photos with explanations of what they are or just include the link to the photo as a side comment or something. [[User:Samantha S\|Samantha S]] ([[User talk:Samantha S\|talk]]) 03:24, 1 March 2013 (CET)
		+
	Dear Tara and Loren, you write this article together. Please contact each other and work well together. Loren is more concentrating on the historical part and Tara more on the literary aspect of Confucius. [[User:Root\|Root]] ([[User talk:Root\|talk]]) 19:55, 26 February 2013 (CET)		Dear Tara and Loren, you write this article together. Please contact each other and work well together. Loren is more concentrating on the historical part and Tara more on the literary aspect of Confucius. [[User:Root\|Root]] ([[User talk:Root\|talk]]) 19:55, 26 February 2013 (CET)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:14, 1 March 2013
Line 21:		Line 21:

	This was quite lengthy and very informative. My favorite part was when you mentioned about filial piety, and the golden rule, etc. I like hearing confucian philosophy. He was a smart guy. Dr who (talk) 28 February 2013 (CET)		This was quite lengthy and very informative. My favorite part was when you mentioned about filial piety, and the golden rule, etc. I like hearing confucian philosophy. He was a smart guy. Dr who (talk) 28 February 2013 (CET)
		+
		+	Loren- I think considering there is so much about Confucius that is uncertain that you've done a good job! [[User:Leo1299\|Leo1299]] ([[User talk:Leo1299\|talk]]) 03:14, 1 March 2013 (CET)

	=old comments=		=old comments=

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:05, 28 February 2013
Line 19:		Line 19:

	It looks pretty good. I like all the pictures you put in there. [[User:Ratu\|Ratu]] ([[User talk:Ratu\|talk]]) 8:36, 28 February 2013 (CET)		It looks pretty good. I like all the pictures you put in there. [[User:Ratu\|Ratu]] ([[User talk:Ratu\|talk]]) 8:36, 28 February 2013 (CET)
		+
		+	This was quite lengthy and very informative. My favorite part was when you mentioned about filial piety, and the golden rule, etc. I like hearing confucian philosophy. He was a smart guy. Dr who (talk) 28 February 2013 (CET)

	=old comments=		=old comments=

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:37, 28 February 2013
Line 17:		Line 17:

	I think having a conclusion paragraph would be beneficial.--[[User:TaraDFroisland\|MerchantThief]] ([[User talk:TaraDFroisland\|talk]]) 02:46, 28 February 2013 (CET)		I think having a conclusion paragraph would be beneficial.--[[User:TaraDFroisland\|MerchantThief]] ([[User talk:TaraDFroisland\|talk]]) 02:46, 28 February 2013 (CET)
		+
		+	It looks pretty good. I like all the pictures you put in there. [[User:Ratu\|Ratu]] ([[User talk:Ratu\|talk]]) 8:36, 28 February 2013 (CET)

	=old comments=		=old comments=

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:46, 28 February 2013
Line 15:		Line 15:

	It would be good to proofread the paragraphs; there are a few grammatical errors that appear in the article. Maybe not accurate, but I remember hearing the concept of "Wen" when I've heard others discuss Confucius, which was literary studies and the moral value of such an idea; it might be a good thing to research and add to the page. [[User:Cappuccino\|Cappuccino]] ([[User talk:Cappuccino\|talk]]) 08:01, 26 February 2013 (CET)		It would be good to proofread the paragraphs; there are a few grammatical errors that appear in the article. Maybe not accurate, but I remember hearing the concept of "Wen" when I've heard others discuss Confucius, which was literary studies and the moral value of such an idea; it might be a good thing to research and add to the page. [[User:Cappuccino\|Cappuccino]] ([[User talk:Cappuccino\|talk]]) 08:01, 26 February 2013 (CET)
		+
		+	I think having a conclusion paragraph would be beneficial.--[[User:TaraDFroisland\|MerchantThief]] ([[User talk:TaraDFroisland\|talk]]) 02:46, 28 February 2013 (CET)

	=old comments=		=old comments=

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:10, 27 February 2013
Line 11:		Line 11:
	*There are also some pictures, who are not visible in my version of your ppt. It looks like you embedded them with Quicktime, but not everybody has it. So you may want to send me the pictures one by one and I can help you to input them in the presentation again the normal way (in Powerpoint using "Insert" "Graphic").[[User:Root\|Root]] ([[User talk:Root\|talk]]) 22:13, 19 February 2013 (CET)		*There are also some pictures, who are not visible in my version of your ppt. It looks like you embedded them with Quicktime, but not everybody has it. So you may want to send me the pictures one by one and I can help you to input them in the presentation again the normal way (in Powerpoint using "Insert" "Graphic").[[User:Root\|Root]] ([[User talk:Root\|talk]]) 22:13, 19 February 2013 (CET)

		+	I like that you have as many sources as you do, it makes the article more credible. I would do some more proof reading to make sure the wording is more coherent.[[User:Oprah wind fury\|Oprah wind fury]] ([[User talk:Oprah wind fury\|talk]]) 15:09, 27 February 2013 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:13, 27 February 2013
Line 30:		Line 30:

	== Didn't you notice? It says, at the start, that he is never supposed to have spoken of himself in first person. That is why, even though he is "speaking of himself" it is written in third person. That is also why it says, at the end, that he should maybe start to speak of himself in first person.[[User:Dekeo\|Dekeo]] 20:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		== Didn't you notice? It says, at the start, that he is never supposed to have spoken of himself in first person. That is why, even though he is "speaking of himself" it is written in third person. That is also why it says, at the end, that he should maybe start to speak of himself in first person.[[User:Dekeo\|Dekeo]] 20:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	== Writing a paper in first person is very difficult and makes for a hard to read page. I would much prefer to read a third person narrative on a persons life. This is good though and gives a lot of information on Confucious' life and teachings.[[User:Anonymous5\|Anonymous5]] ([[User talk:Anonymous5\|talk]]) 21:13, 27 February 2013 (CET) ==