Talk:Lorenzo Ghiberti

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
 
WikiProject Visual arts (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 

Vittorio Ghiberti[edit]

Apparently Lorenzo Ghiberti had a son, Vittorio Ghiberti, but it's not clear if the son is notable. The son may be buried at the Basilica of Santa Croce, Florence. --Marc Kupper|talk 20:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Who watches this page?[edit]

This is a major disruption to the article. in fact, it's what you call "highjacking".

Prior to the Renaissance, a clearly modern optical basis of perspective was given in the period between 1028 and 1038, when the Arab polymath Alhazen (al-Hasan Ibn al-Haytham, d. ca. 1041 CE) in his Book of Optics (Kitab al-manazir; known in Latin as De aspectibus or Perspectiva), explained that light projects conically into the eye,[1] discussing perspective. By the 14th century, Alhazen's Book of Optics was available in Italian translation, entitled Deli Aspecti, and Ghiberti relied heavily upon this work, quoting it "verbatim and at length" while framing his account of art and its aesthetic imperatives in the “Commentario terzo.” Alhazen’s work was thus "central to the development of Ghiberti’s thought about art and visual aesthetics" and "may well have been central to the development of artificial perspective in early Renaissance Italian painting."[2]

Basically, it doesn't matter how accurate the material may be, or how well referenced it is, if it isn't on the subject of Ghiberti and his work, then it doesn't belong here.

Yes, Alhazen's work should be referred to as a source, used by Ghiberti. No, the paragraph ought not be primarily about Alhazen.

Amandajm (talk) 13:23, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist}} template (see the help page).