Talk:River Brent

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am not very happy with the etymology section as it is more like a essay. The problem I faced, was that with so little solid evidence, any conjecture needs to have the context explained, in order for the reader to understand why such ideas have been put forward (both the serious and plain daft). Also it helps the reader to appreciated that what is written in history books is not always 'the facts' but just educated guesses based on what little hard evidence is dug up and together with any contemporary writings which may survive. Not forgetting: history get written in a way that reflects (to some extent) the mood and thinking of the period in which it is composed. All this, makes it rather a long section. Therefore, I have added it – still somewhat unpolished (references to be added soon). Maybe the way to deal with its length is to add much more text about other aspects of the Brent on other sections so as to make this section seem shorter.

Needles to say I will transfer some of the Hanwell applicable text to that article but for now, I don't what to confuse matters by making the two articles cite each other which might support any faux pas that may creep in. --Aspro 08:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)