|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Festivals etc..
- 2 Adding of Sports and Entertainment
- 3 Shouldn't "Era" be capitalized?
- 4 Current Era
- 5 Semiprot?
- 6 British spelling?
- 7 NOTES!!
- 8 Elizabethan era as opposed to Elizabethan times
- 9 Rearranging images
- 10 Copyright violation
- 11 Elizabethan Ireland
- 12 Merge Elizabethan leisure
- 13 Elizabethan dance
- 14 Economy, Society?
- 15 End of eras
- 16 Elizabethan Era Literature
- 17 Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2013
- 18 Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2015
- 19 C vs. B class
- The material on traditional festivals isn't sourced, and I wonder if it should be moved to a more general article on traditional festivals of pre-industrial England?
- I'm editing it to make it more consistent with Wiki style, but I also vote to move it. Seems an odd fit here. Egthegreat 20:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
These festivities weren't specifically Elizabethan (except for the Accession Day celebrations of course!).
See the various works of Ronald Hutton (especially The Rise and Fall of Merry England and The Stations of the Sun) for even-handed general discussions of English folk-customs in the light of recent scholarship. - PKM 20:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
- Can you not add these book to the "reference" section? You seem to have the details of these books. It would be appreciated. Dieter Simon 00:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'll put them in as further reading - "reference" suggests (to me) that the books support what's said above, and I am dubious about some of it. - PKM 02:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
what about weapons..?
- Weapons in festivals? Or do you mean a seperate topic? Watersoftheoasis 20:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with this proposition except with reference to festivals that are particular to this era. Those should be left here in addition to being added to the new article I would think.Dougjaso (talk) 09:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)dougjaso
Adding of Sports and Entertainment
Entertainment should be added as it was a large part of many people's lives during this time period. I have taken it upon myself to add it in. Watersoftheoasis 20:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- just wanted to add that someone should probably remove that link to "whims" in the sports section. It points to some ominous canadian labor guidelines —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't "Era" be capitalized?
Its like that in the article, but not in the title. JONJONAUG 15:43, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose - The mentions in the article should be set to Elizabethan era. See also Victorian era, Jacobean era. ~ trialsanderrors 19:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose general WP style to use lower-case. Septentrionalis 04:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
NO what the hell .. it just a word GOSHH
What is the current era called? --Daniel C. Boyer 17:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- I see your point, as I would see today as the Elizabethan era as well, and Elizabeth II has reigned a lot longer than Elizabeth I and has seen a lot more events. Jamandell (d69) 20:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- This bugs me as well. The Second Elizabethan Era maybe? 18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not to be crass, but since when do eras get named before they end? Romantic era poets did not refer to themselves as "Romantic era poets" for example.Dougjaso (talk) 09:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)dougjaso
I'm starting to wonder is semi-protection should be requested for this article. It seems relatively besieged with vandals. Thoughts? Vassyana 02:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Agree. Yes, please. - PKM 03:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
What is the general opinion among Wikipedians re British spelling in an arch-English subject such as this? We have centralized, well-organized and even English colonization in this article. Should that not be changed to centralised, well-organised and colonisation? After all, any British spellings in an article about the United States would be changed in next to no time, wouldn't it? Dieter Simon 02:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- I would support British spelling in this article; would you want to make the changes? - PKM 18:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC) (a Californian)
- Have changed back to the British spellings. Dieter Simon 01:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Where are the notes at the bottom of the page showing sources???
- See "See also" and "Further reading" section in article itself. Would appreciate you sign-in name though. Dieter Simon 23:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- They disappeared in a series of edits and restores. I have put them back. - PKM 18:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Elizabethan era as opposed to Elizabethan times
Hi Chutem, please do not keep moving article to "Elizabethan times", saying readers are more likely to look for "Elizabethan times" than they are for "Elizabethan era". That is already taken care of as you would notice if you searched for "E.t.". It would automatically direct you to "E.e", and you couldn't miss it. Dieter Simon 22:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I have added the Armada portrait to be the lead image, as it sums up the "Golden Age" myth quite nicely without a caption. The allegory with mythological "peace & plenty" may not be obvious to modern readers without the caption. - PKM 03:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I think this article needs a section on Ireland.
Daily Elizabethan Food Consumption for the Lower Classes The food eaten daily by the average Lower Class Elizabethan consisted of at least ½ lb. bread, 1 pint of beer, 1 pint of porridge, and 1/4 lb of meat. This would have been supplemented with some dairy products - vegetables were a substantial ingredient of soups. Records show that the daily ration of a food for a Tudor soldier with 2 lb. of beef or mutton with l lb. cheese, l/2 lb. butter, 1.5 lb. bread and 2/3 gallon of beer! It is probably worth pointing out that the the beer had a very low alcohol content!
Merge Elizabethan leisure
I recommend that we merge Elizabethan leisure into the appropriate section of this article, and replace the unreferenced and unencyclopedic lists on both pages with narrative paragraphs, properly sourced from high-quality written secondary sources. Any disagreement? - PKM (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I notice there's no mention of the topic of Elizabethan dance. See this excellent site for information that can be used to expand this article. http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/elizabethan-dance.htm -- œ™ 01:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
End of eras
Per the block at the right that lists the eras, what happens after the Edwardian era? It just ends? If you actually go the Edwardian era article, it has the block at the right which says it's followed by "World War I" which takes you to History of the United Kingdom during World War I. THAT one has a block at right which says it's followed by "Interwar period" which isn't about England specifically, and doesn't have a block at all so no idea what comes after that.
Basically the continuity starts to fall apart here and ends completely two articles later in the sequence, at Interwar period. I'm not sure how to fix this, perhaps someone more expert in the period could do so? Or is the history of the UK no longer defined in "eras" after that point?
Elizabethan Era Literature
For some reason, there is no section in this article that deals with Elizabethan era literature. I realize there is an entirely different page dedicated to Elizabethan era literature entitled "Elizabethan Literature." However, for purposes of both comprehensiveness and convenience, I would include a new section entitled "Literature" with a link to the "Elizabethan Literature" page. If I had to hazard a guess, I would bet that at least 40% of the visitors to this page are looking for Elizabethan era literature as I was when I came here. It took me 10-15 minutes to realize that the literature of the era was included in a completely different page as there are no obvious links to that page on this page. Perhaps I'm dense. Probably so. However, I think there are some people out there as dense as I and the energy it would take to create this section with but a link could not be too taxing. Thank you for your consideration.Dougjaso (talk) 08:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)dougjaso
Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2013
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
In third paragraph of main description section, it would probably be better to word the sentence because it sounds better this way: "The Elizabethan Age is viewed so highly largely because of the periods before and after." rather than "The Elizabethan Age is viewed so highly because of the periods before and after." basically just removing the absolution of the reason behind the praise of the era. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2015
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Typo in the third paragraph. "The Elizabethan Age may be viewed especially highly when considered in light of the failings of the periods prceeeding Elizabeth's reign..." Drake lazarus (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
C vs. B class
The present state of this article seems to me to be a "B" class article. Is there any reason not to promote it to B class? It is well-written, covers almost all of the possible material, & is well-referenced. Otherwise, the only omission I can find is one that might escape all but the specialist: no mention of the "Great Rebuilding", a period in English history when the houses of the average inhabitant, i.e. most people, massively improved. Houses gained rooms, a second floor, chimneys & fireplaces -- previously, the hearth was an open fire that sent its smoke out thru a hole in the roof -- & the windows were glazed. The person who uncovered this otherwise undocumented revolution was W.G. Hoskins, & his books provide evidence for its changes. But adding that would only make this article closer to GA status, IMHO. -- llywrch (talk) 22:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)