Talk:In Memoriam A.H.H.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Untitled

As a general rule, in order not to be a mere text dump, entries that quote poetry ought to discuss it, for the quotes are like illustrations of points, which should be made in the entry itself. Wetman 20:23, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'd agree with moving the two excerpts to Wikisource; the text that introduces the prelude & section L makes a good stub introduction, but could probably be filled out fairly easily to show examples of the sorts of engagements that Tennyson uses throughout the elegy. Norrie

Untitled

When typing In Memoriam into the search a page for a"symphonic poem by the american composer Douglas Moore" comes up instead. As I assume that Tennyson's In Memoriam is the better known of the two this page should be the one that shows up in a search and not the other or there should be a disambiguation page. Would anyone like to fix it? Kakaze 19:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

"The British 19th century" sounds a bit odd, as if that century belonged to the British. (I suppose in some ways it did.) I'd rather see "one of the greatest British poems of the 19th century" or simply "one of the greatest poems of the 19th century" if anyone can find a source for the broader claim. 65.213.77.129 (talk) 13:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 22:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

"The evangelical idea of unquestioning belief in revealed truth taken from a literal interpretation of the Bible was already in conflict with the findings of science ..." This is an unnecessarily editorialized comment. Evangelicalism as a religious movement would not exist for almost 125 years after the writing of this poem. This seems like anachronistic reference for the purpose of highlighting a contemporary political debate. --68.183.11.35 (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

It was and is used by both those opposed to and in favour of the theory of evolution.[3][4][5][6] All the references for this sentence are or irrelevent or broken link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.29.169.85 (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on In Memoriam A.H.H.. 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/20070812173207/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Books/selfpage.shtml to http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Books/selfpage.shtml

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:49, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]