Talk:Craft Potters Association

Anyone interested in
The recent changes do not make sense:
 * (1) Originally the article contained "Anyone interested in ceramics or pottery " I removed "ceramics" as the Association is not interested in most ceramic materials. It is only interested in clay based ones, and those made by studio potters.
 * (2) This edit was then reverted back because, it was argued, the name of the Association's magazine is 'Ceramic Review.'
 * (3) I then removed "pottery" and added "art" to ceramics. This would be more logical then the original.
 * (4) "Pottery" was then re-inserted!

The current description of "art ceramics and pottery" is tautological at best, and really borders on the illogical.

Despite the name of its magazine it is wrong to suggest the association has relevance to all ceramics. It doesn't! Look at it the other way - would the magazine be interested in publishing articles on, say: spark plugs; thread guides; capacitors; bullet proof vest inserts? All these are ceramic articles.

The best description would simply be "Anyone interested in studio pottery"


 * I don't understand why you consider it a tautology? Art ceramics and pottery don't have the same meaning.
 * "Anyone interested in art ceramics and pottery" seems fine, since members are not necessarily potters... some are sculptors using clay as a medium.Teapotgeorge (talk) 19:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi - I agree that "art ceramics and pottery" are not the same, for example "pottery" is not exclusive to art / studio potters. Could you explain; why you say are these sculptors not potters? What is wrong with my suggestion of "Anyone interested in studio pottery"?


 * The CPA website http://www.cpaceramics.co.uk/membership.php says that they "represent studio potters and ceramic artists". Ceramic artists are not necessarily potters... they could be making sculptures not pots. Teapotgeorge (talk) 21:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Pottery is not necessarily pots! Pottery also refers to a group of materials. Anyway I have changed the article as per your reference.

New internal link
I can see where our coming from on this, but I don't think it helps. The ceramic art article includes major sections with the associtaion is not interested in, for example Ancient history and Industrial art ceramics. In fact there is more in the article that is not relevant to CPA than actually is. On balance I think ceramic artists is the best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.253.151 (talk) 21:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually I've just re-read the CPA link you gave. Why not just quote from them? "Membership of the CPA is available to individual makers and to anyone interested in studio ceramics. There are three categories of membership, Fellowship, Professional member and Associate."


 * Sounds sensible. Teapotgeorge (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Have now changed. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.253.151 (talk) 21:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Craft Potters Association. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070210035711/http://www.ceramics.org.uk/home.php to http://www.ceramics.org.uk/home.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927012015/http://www.ruffordceramiccentre.org.uk/ceramic/history/essayview.asp?select=7 to http://www.ruffordceramiccentre.org.uk/ceramic/history/essayview.asp?select=7

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:35, 14 August 2017 (UTC)