2601:602:8080:29B0:7DDD:FDF7:1B3:C400

Romanesque architecture.

Just reverted your edits.

If you look and read, it is clear that the article has been written by someone who really knows their stuff.

If that sentence describing what is called "Norman architecture" was wrong- then it must have stood as very very wrong for more than ten years, in an article of very high importance.

No, Norman architecture is the architecture that the Normans brought across the Channel with William the Conqueror in 1066. And it almost always has round arches.

The only exceptions to the round arches are in Sicily, on a couple of buildings where Islamic architecture prevailed and where it is probable that Islamic builders were emplyed. There is also a unique example at Autun Cathedral in France, where pointed arches are used throughout an otherwise Romanesque building

I think that you also made a change to the introduction of Michelangelo's David. There is a discussion on the talk page as to what may or may not be considered a "Masterpiece" and why that word ought to be applied to certain works which are beyond question unique and renowned above others.

In the case of David, there is not the tiniest shade of doubt about its greatness, its fame, or its unique position in the history of art. To understand this work, the reader MUST understand, from the introduction, just how very significant a wor this is. If people think of it as just another statue of a standing male figure, then they have not got the right idea. They have missed the point.

Amandajm (talk) 00:39, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that the style with the pointed arches is Gothic architecture, and that the article on Gothic architecture has been badly butchered by some rather less-than-expert, but very determined editors.

I will fix it sooner or later.

Amandajm (talk) 00:42, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

---