Talk:Master Hugo

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group. Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts

The following statement, which appears in the article on this date, makes a dubious claim that is not supported by—and indeed contradicted by—published research:

He has been credited with having made the ivory Cloisters Cross (or "Bury St. Edmunds Cross"), now at The Cloisters, New York, but this is doubtful; there is no certain evidence to suggest that the cross was even made in England, although this is accepted by most scholars, and other places of origin such as Germany have been proposed (emphasis added).

If there is any reasonable basis for this claim, then the originator needs to add references to the article. Unsubstantiated opinion (such as the statement, "this is doubtful") has no place in Wikipedia.

Published research provides reason to believe that the crucifix credited to Master Hugo is the Bury St. Edmunds Cross.

PlaysInPeoria (talk) 04:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is certainly "published research" (not exactly the right word) that suggests it is, but since the comment was added by an editor (not me) who is a professional art historian specialising in exactly this period (work it out), I am pretty confident there will also be "published research" suggesting it is not, as is often the way. You will notice the MMA currently does not claim it was made by Hugo or in Bury, although it does say it is English, even though Hoving's book of many years ago was pretty confident. I suggest you remove your tag. What recent research did you have in mind? Johnbod (talk) 04:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]