Talk:Stonemasonry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] External Links
A couple of those links are for businesses. I don't think that's appropriate, does anyone else? Mincan 19:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Edits
I took the liberty of adding and editing many sections of the page. These included the Definition, Training, Tools, and History of sections, adding a substantial amount of original material. I also removed the three tags that were at the forefront of the article. The cleanup article, because I have cleaned up the article somewhat. The merge with modern stonemasonry, as I find that article completely unencyclopedic and inappropriate for even it's own page, let alone merging it with this page. And the third tag was "See also Masonry" which is redundant as that is located at the end of the article in the "See also" section. --Mincan 06:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the edits today Triglyph2, I noticed the shortened history section. I believe that the space allocated for the history of the medieval stonemasons was quite unbalanced. Perhaps I will create some new shorter information. We have so much information from this period and it is the period that started the trade down the path it is on today. One can make the argument the middle ages formed the base of which the modern world is built upon. Mincan 09:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 1911 Britannica article on Free-stone
Thought this might be useful. User:FeanorStar7
FREE-STONE (a translation of the Old Fr. franche pere or pierre, i.e. stone of good quality; the modern French equivalent is pierre de taille, and Ital. pietra molle), stone used in architecture for mouldings, tracery and other work required to be worked with the chisel. The oolitic stones are generally so called, although in some countries soft sandstones are used; in some churches an indurated chalk called clunch is employed for internal lining and for carving.
- I'm going to have a go at rewriting this page. It contains a lot of info but in no coherent structure. It also has many gaps, misconceptions and inaccuracies. Please let me know what you think.
- I also think it should be moved to stonemasonry.--Stonemad GB 22:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of material
I have deleted the following sentences:
- "However, The Modern day mason should be skilled and competant to carry out all aspects of masonry. There should be no divide between the precise setting out, working the stone's (The banker mason) and the fixing. Todays Masons Should have the Training and skills perform all task"
The reason is that this comment is not necessarily true. While many masons are competent in all branches of the craft, there are also many more who specialise say in banker work, and would not have the experience to do complex fixing tasks. The trend is definitely towards increased specialisation.--Stonemad GB 22:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps we can re-add this in? However, we should use the terms "may" instead of "should". As far as the trend moving one way or the other. You cannot speak for the entire world, and in my part of the world, Canada, the trend is definitely going the other way, whereby one mason can be required to do quite a bit. But it is important to say that some stonemasons have the ability to carry out two or more of these specialisations. --Mincan 00:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
