Talk:Song of the hoe

Illustrations
There are four pictures included in this article, and three of them are poorly used.


 * 1) The hoes in the first picture have a caption that states that they are similar to the ones in the text. You cannot use hoes from America to illustrate hoes from Mesopotamia unless you justify the use of that picture in your caption. So say how the hoes are similar, and say how they are different. i.e.   "Stones hoes were widely produced. These come from America, date (????BCE)"
 * 2) The second caption is ridiculous! These Chinese wooden hoes do NOT represent the hoes after creation. If the picture is used, then the caption must state what they actually are.
 * 3) Why are there two similar picture of a modern hoe, (probably the same hoe) when one picture of this simple implement is quite enough?

Amandajm (talk) 03:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I hope to have addressed your concerns with an improvement in the caption text. The excessive use of hoe images remains for satirical effect. I suggest our ancestors were attempting humour in their song, and that they would have been pleased to have it passed on in a similar form in this article. Let me know if you think I'm over-"hoe"-ing it. Cheers. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 23:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, you must look and think before you write a caption! How can three hoes of entirely different shape, obviously hand crafted, in what appears to be a museum display, (dead blowfly and all), possibly be described as "modern" and "mass-produced"?
 * Having the same modern hoe (or any two modern hoes) represented twice is too much. The humour will almost certainly be lost, in an encyclopedic article. Amandajm (talk) 05:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for that, I was trying to make too many corrections last night too quickly. I see your point and have no objection if one of the hoes has to go. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 07:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. I sound rather rude! Amandajm (talk) 09:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)