Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Early modern history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Early modern history

Rather incoherent, has nothing at all to do with the article title. I don't think there is anything here that can be salvaged. -- Ferkelparade π 09:21, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Make it a part of late-modern history. --Feedle 17:32, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Now it's a redirect. Just a comment: there is no standardization for what "early modern" means. I find the term rather awful, myself. I have heard people working on Roman de la Rose say they were working on "early modern" literature. I've heard people who were working on Anglo-Saxon say their field was "early modern." I've heard people use it for Renaissance. To me, it's all weasle stuff, because no one wants to admit that they study anything old or seem like they might accept a value judgment from a prior age. Well, get over it. Divide history in any way, and you make a value judgment. Don't divide it, and you can't teach a class or structure your doctoral exams. As bad as the old terms were, at least they were already done and settled. Geogre 18:46, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Yeah, it is a term of convenience, nothing more. For example, I use "early modern" to describe literary English after Malory (ca. 1460 or so) up to Shakespeare and the KJV Bible, because that is about as far back as I can read with little difficulty. Others' mileage may vary. Fire Star
• Delete. Not encyclopedic -- what does "early modern" mean? --Improv 20:25, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Was speedied and then set as a redirect, case closed. —siroχo 03:54, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)