Talk:The Classic of Tea: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary |
→first monograph?: new section |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:The problem might be that an English translation is not past copyright...[[User:XinJeisan|XinJeisan]] 04:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC) |
:The problem might be that an English translation is not past copyright...[[User:XinJeisan|XinJeisan]] 04:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC) |
||
:The only translation is from 1974, so that is still well within copyright. However, what does this reference (Shapira, et al., 150)?????[[User:XinJeisan|XinJeisan]] 04:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC) |
:The only translation is from 1974, so that is still well within copyright. However, what does this reference (Shapira, et al., 150)?????[[User:XinJeisan|XinJeisan]] 04:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC) |
||
== first monograph? == |
|||
It seems to me that [[The Record of Tea]] is the same subject, but much earlier. Yet this article claims that this book is the first monograph about tea in the world. [[Special:Contributions/64.202.157.11|64.202.157.11]] ([[User talk:64.202.157.11|talk]]) 02:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:31, 12 March 2009
This is clearly past copyright, does anyone have an online version of the text which could be added as a link?--Crossmr 04:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- The problem might be that an English translation is not past copyright...XinJeisan 04:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- The only translation is from 1974, so that is still well within copyright. However, what does this reference (Shapira, et al., 150)?????XinJeisan 04:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
first monograph?
It seems to me that The Record of Tea is the same subject, but much earlier. Yet this article claims that this book is the first monograph about tea in the world. 64.202.157.11 (talk) 02:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)