Talk:Capodimonte porcelain

Comments
Hi all, I see the text has been trnasfered from the porcelain article. I agree that it is best as a sepearte article. Can I ask the original author, or others, to:
 * Provided supporting citations
 * Explain why Capodimonte Porcelain is a "specific technique." Personally I'm not convinced of the latter, not that that is necessary for inclusion in the article :-)

ThanxTheriac 23:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I Theriac I really don't know how to explain this peculiar way of creating flowers and figures by hands. Please, as I find your advices very interesting (I create the specific page Capodimonte porcelain thank to your advice), please correct me the way you think the best. Then, what do you mean with "citation needed" when I write that porcelain of capodimonte is famous all over the world. It is so. There is a famous museum in Naples visited every day by thousand people and today the production of this kind of porcelain is very active and represents a typical italian souvenir (like murano glass of Venice for exaple). You can find it in the internal link with Museo di Capodimonte.

Thanx Sabrina

Hello Sabrina. Please do not remove tags. They are used for reasons. They show that text has been added without supporting citations or references. Please create yourself a Wikipedia account. Please also refer to Wikipedia's guidlines, including: ThanxTheriac 19:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
 * "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should be appropriate to the claims made: exceptional claims require stronger sources."''

SORRY I didn't know about tags. Please help me. My name is Sabrina Majello I'm from Naples, I graduated 4 yars ago in History of art and literature. I'm really expert of Capodimonte has my father is a famous sculptor but I'm NOT ABLE to use computer well and to create a wikipedia account. Can you explain me how to do in a simple way?

Thank you very much. Sabrina

Hello Sabrina. This is difficult as I am also much better on ceramics than computers! There are many pages on Wikipedia that could help. Try studying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents ThanxTheriac 20:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well than you know the difference between the hard porcelain past of Meissen and the soft porcelain past of capodimonte. So, why did yu eliminate my internal link in generic porcelain?


 * I did not eliminate your internal link. It is still there Theriac 20:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi theriac, please can you explain me what do you mean with "citation needed" what kind of citation? Thank you Sabrina


 * Folks, the following description is not unique to Capodimonte, but describes porcelain techniques in general: a particular way of working and decorating the porcelain by hand to create figures and above all cups of flowers. This process of moulding porcelain to create the object is followed by a first firing at 1250 degrees Celsius, then the object is decorated by hand and fired again at 750 degrees Celsius to fix the colours. --Wetman 07:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have added a section describing porcelain as a substance and also its origin and history in Europe. This information was originally written by me and published on the information page of my company Capodimonte Limited. --Capodimonte-ltd (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

COI
I've removed the conflict-of-interest tag; I don't see any conflict of interest present here. The person who added the tag alluded to a contributor having a commercial interest in the subject, but I don't see any evidence of that, nor was it discussed here. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it wasn't so much COI as perhaps coatracking or maybe just misguided overzealotry; I've eliminated a large swath of text about porcelain in general that has nothing to do with Capodimonte porcelain, but rather refers to porcelain in general. Perhaps it could be integrated with the Porcelain article, were anyone so inclined, but given that it's unreferenced, I doubt it's worth the effort. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Possible copyright violation?
The "History" section of this article bears a close resemblance to the text at this antiques sales site. I can't determine if the antique site is older or newer than the text in our article. For now, I'm leaving the text in, but I will ask the copyright experts to have a look and see if it needs to be adjusted. In the meantime, I will not copy-edit that section of the article to avoid confusing the issue further. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 18:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Not a stump?
I see other wikipedia entries with more substance that are labelled stumps. Why not this one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.109.37 (talk) 22:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)