Jump to content

Talk:Sacred Cod: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 67: Line 67:
What does this mean, and can anyone find if this source explains it better? It could be used in prose, it does not need to be a quote in the article. It makes no sense how individuals and corporations would recognize or "pay tribute" to cods...
What does this mean, and can anyone find if this source explains it better? It could be used in prose, it does not need to be a quote in the article. It makes no sense how individuals and corporations would recognize or "pay tribute" to cods...


"Years before the statesmen of the period had decided to make public acknowl­edge­ment of the indebted­ness of the colony to the codfish, and had voted to adorn the assem­bly chamber with a wooden repre­sen­ta­tion thereof, indi­vid­uals and private cor­po­ra­tions were eager to pay tribute to the codfish, and vied with one another in their anxiety to make the recognition as conspicuous as possible." -- "A History of the Emblem of the Codfish in the Hall of the House of Representatives." Compiled by a Committee of the House. (1895)
:"Years before the statesmen of the period had decided to make public acknowl­edge­ment of the indebted­ness of the colony to the codfish, and had voted to adorn the assem­bly chamber with a wooden repre­sen­ta­tion thereof, indi­vid­uals and private cor­po­ra­tions were eager to pay tribute to the codfish, and vied with one another in their anxiety to make the recognition as conspicuous as possible." -- "A History of the Emblem of the Codfish in the Hall of the House of Representatives." Compiled by a Committee of the House. (1895)


--[[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#bbb 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em;" class="texhtml">'''ɱ'''</span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|(talk)]] 22:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
--[[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#bbb 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em;" class="texhtml">'''ɱ'''</span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|(talk)]] 22:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
::I'm sorry, but if you can't see "how individuals and corporations would recognize or 'pay tribute' to cods" then you don't understand the subject of the article at all. [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color:red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color:blue;">Eng</b>]] 00:35, 9 April 2022 (UTC)


{{ping|EEng}} I was attempting to clean up an article that appeared to be cluttered with quotes, primary sources, and a few tangentially related images. I believe most of this is better represented as prose in the article body. There are other egregious errors; right off the bat, I noticed a windy run-on sentence at the very start of the lede. I have also noticed several tongue-in-cheek words or ways of phrasing. While the subject is amusing, many of these ways of writing about it are not encyclopedic. [[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#bbb 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em;" class="texhtml">'''ɱ'''</span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|(talk)]] 23:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
{{ping|EEng}} I was attempting to clean up an article that appeared to be cluttered with quotes, primary sources, and a few tangentially related images. I believe most of this is better represented as prose in the article body. There are other egregious errors; right off the bat, I noticed a windy run-on sentence at the very start of the lede. I have also noticed several tongue-in-cheek words or ways of phrasing. While the subject is amusing, many of these ways of writing about it are not encyclopedic. [[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#bbb 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em;" class="texhtml">'''ɱ'''</span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|(talk)]] 23:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

[[File:NP Kenya 211011 34 (6269481663).jpg|thumb|upright=0.8|It was tedious to write, it should be tedious to read.]]
:The opening sentence is not a run-on; please look that term up in a dictionary. I fear you may have read so many cookie-cutter articles that you think that's the way everything's supposed to be.{{pb}}Beyond that, the ''whole point'' of the Sacred Cod is the faux reverence given it -- starting with its name and the bombastic, flowery prose indulged in by the "Committee on the History of the Emblem of the Codfish" of the House of Representatives of the Great and General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The sources ''are'' tongue-in-cheek, and the article, by quoting those sources, simply reflects that for the reader. [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color:red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color:blue;">Eng</b>]] 00:35, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:47, 9 April 2022

Good articleSacred Cod has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 13, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
April 13, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
June 17, 2012Good article nomineeListed
January 12, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
February 17, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 1, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Massachusetts House of Representatives refused to legislate until the Sacred Cod of Massachusetts was rescued from cod-nappers?
Current status: Good article

Pranks source

  • [1] NYT, paywell

See esp. [3] re verse, and [4]

political significance

Is there any truth to the idea that the Cod faces north when the Democrats hold the majority and south when the Republicans do? 74.69.9.224 (talk) 19:29, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently not -- see last bit of [5]. Anyway, in the last 150 years there have only been 3 changes of majority (1949, 1953, 1955) so little chance for such a "tradition" to form. Sounds like tourguide bullshit. EEng (talk) 11:32, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible image for Codnapping

  • [6] I suspect that this is not the Senate chamber, but the House, and this gent is pointing to the wires which had been cut to kidnap the Cod. If that could be confirmed somehow, because of the current licensing this could only be included as an "external media" box, like the Charles Apted photo already there. EEng 04:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More sources

Quote

What does this mean, and can anyone find if this source explains it better? It could be used in prose, it does not need to be a quote in the article. It makes no sense how individuals and corporations would recognize or "pay tribute" to cods...

"Years before the statesmen of the period had decided to make public acknowl­edge­ment of the indebted­ness of the colony to the codfish, and had voted to adorn the assem­bly chamber with a wooden repre­sen­ta­tion thereof, indi­vid­uals and private cor­po­ra­tions were eager to pay tribute to the codfish, and vied with one another in their anxiety to make the recognition as conspicuous as possible." -- "A History of the Emblem of the Codfish in the Hall of the House of Representatives." Compiled by a Committee of the House. (1895)

--ɱ (talk) 22:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but if you can't see "how individuals and corporations would recognize or 'pay tribute' to cods" then you don't understand the subject of the article at all. EEng 00:35, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng: I was attempting to clean up an article that appeared to be cluttered with quotes, primary sources, and a few tangentially related images. I believe most of this is better represented as prose in the article body. There are other egregious errors; right off the bat, I noticed a windy run-on sentence at the very start of the lede. I have also noticed several tongue-in-cheek words or ways of phrasing. While the subject is amusing, many of these ways of writing about it are not encyclopedic. ɱ (talk) 23:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was tedious to write, it should be tedious to read.
The opening sentence is not a run-on; please look that term up in a dictionary. I fear you may have read so many cookie-cutter articles that you think that's the way everything's supposed to be.
Beyond that, the whole point of the Sacred Cod is the faux reverence given it -- starting with its name and the bombastic, flowery prose indulged in by the "Committee on the History of the Emblem of the Codfish" of the House of Representatives of the Great and General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The sources are tongue-in-cheek, and the article, by quoting those sources, simply reflects that for the reader. EEng 00:35, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]