Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a23248de99583a24

Jump to content

Talk:Mendinho

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 16 years ago by 77.54.55.207 in topic Remove Stub template?

Remove Stub template?

[edit]

Is it really a stub? All we know about this poet is a pseudoname and the text of one short poem. All the other data is pure speculation. I do think that no other encyclopedia can bring more details. I recommend removing the Stub template. Gregorio (talk) 06:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

No, don't remove it. The poem is important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.73.121 (talk) 15:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
I agree that the poem important. But it's not a stub, so i proposed to remove the template stub, not the article itself. Anyway, thanks for the edits and additions. Gregorio (talk) 12:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
My pleasure. Please note, though, that it is not the case that "no other encyclopedia can bring more details." See G. Tavani, "Meendinho", in G. Lanciani & G. Tavani, edd., Dicionário da Literatura Medieval Galega e Portuguesa (Lisbon: Caminho, 1993), p. 456. A dictionary, not an encyclopedia, but one that brings quite a few details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Log37 (talkcontribs) 21:33, 21 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Somebody mangled both text and translation. The proposed emendation of Tavani in the refrain has several problems (see www.locuscriticus) and not even Tavani is convinced it's right (he says so on that site). I have gone back to the text we had, but eliminating the end of the verse, which is probably an error. I have also emended the new translation, clearly not the work of a native speaker of English ("Sat I"??).--77.54.55.207 (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply