This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can register your interest for the project and see a list of open tasks.
Have you redirected all the Charles Cotton (poet) refs - I think not. There are lots! Wouldn't it be better to leave as it was, and have the NZ Cotton as a diambiguation line at the top of the main article (ie reinstate Charles Cotton (poet) to Charles Cotton)...Bob aka Linuxlad
Yes, I had the destination in mind, not the journey. And I imagined some disambiguation bot could change the links swiftly. There are 23, less two user pages - not too bad. But judging by the number of Google hits, the poet is far better known in the web than is the geologist, so I presume it would be cleaner as you suggest. Cheers, Daniel Collins 21:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC).
<!--There is a lot of weird wording in this; the style is wholly unlike that of a modern encyclopedia article, with nonsense like "Here is a man who..." and "If this sounds dry and...", as if writing candidly to a friend in a letter. The language overall, since most of it was pulled from Britannica 1911 is stilted and archaic, and far too much time is spent talking about his character and talent in PoV-pushing language, with probably too many quotations for a Wikipedia article. Article also needs a total reorganization, with sections.-->--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)