Jump to content

Talk:Charles and Ray Eames: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
YpnBot (talk | contribs)
m added {{Vital article}}
Should there be separate articles on Charles and Ray?
Line 62: Line 62:
==Eames Category?==
==Eames Category?==
It seems to me that there should be a Charles and Ray Eames category. Does anyone have a rationale not to create one? If no comments to the contrary in a few days, then I'm just going to make one. [[User:KConWiki|KConWiki]] ([[User talk:KConWiki|talk]]) 05:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me that there should be a Charles and Ray Eames category. Does anyone have a rationale not to create one? If no comments to the contrary in a few days, then I'm just going to make one. [[User:KConWiki|KConWiki]] ([[User talk:KConWiki|talk]]) 05:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

==Separate articles?==
Should this article be split into two separate ones? I suppose it depends largely on how notable Ray Eames is in her own right, I guess.
What do you think? Sound off below. [[Special:Contributions/69.179.180.159|69.179.180.159]] ([[User talk:69.179.180.159|talk]]) 00:04, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:04, 15 October 2014

Template:Vital article

Untitled

This article could use some good photos of Charles and Ray Eames (there are wonderful ones!) Can someone look into this?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.241.66 (talk) 22:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it worthwhile to add a note so that people won't get confused between the "Eames Chair" and the "Ames Chair", which seems really easy to do. I inserted the note, but it seems to have been removed.

Here's a picture of an Ames Chair (based on optical illusion): http://www.exploratorium.edu/cmp/exnet/exhibits/group5/ames/

Since I'm a newbie on this, could somebody tell me if this was wrong?

Follow-up:

No, you were correct. I was looking for the Eames chair but didn't know how to spell it. So I found your entry and it clarified the distinction. Thanks!

some ideas to be included?

some important concepts that I think would be nice to include:

  • discussion concerning the focus on process
  • banana leaf parable (can this be taken from an audio and translated to text?)
  • design diagram, at least a description of it.
  • host / guest relationshihp?
  • perhaps it all could fall under a heading of "design philosophy"? also.. most architects (Bucky Fuller, F L Wright, Eero Saarinen etc ) have a list of 'works' .. this as a long list for eames, but probably worthwhile. request for comments. .patrick

    I added a bunch of that stuff .. if anyone has any pictures they would like to add that would be great! -- Dwxyzq 13:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Charles and Ray Eames

    This article should be renamed to Charles and Ray Eames or just Eames. They worked together on most of the projects and she played an important part in most of them. This bias is often seen when talking about great men. Christo and Jeanne-Claude (check the redirect) is working together, but usually you just remember Christo. The Eames Gallery calls itself Charles and Ray Eames Online. Wikipedia has just a stub on Ray Eames and a stub on Charles and Ray Eames. As it is now Charles takes all the credit. All the outside resources are named just Eames, and that is for a reason.DrNumLock 00:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I wholeheartedly second this comment; I came here from the Ray Eames article and was shocked but how little information it contained. We're talking about the female partner of possibly the most well-known design team of the 20th century, not a female artist forgotten by time! I thought that perhaps this article might explain more about the couple's work and why she is merited less attention on Wiki than her husband, but there's nothing in the article that justifies her scanty profile. My suggestion is for both articles to merge under the Charles and Ray Eames article and for their seperate biographical details until their marriage to be covered under different headings. Skywaterblue (talk) 00:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I've history merged the three articles according to these comments. Ray's section should still be expanded; and more editing, writing, references and images are probably needed overall to improve the article, but at least Charles doesn't seem to recieve too much credit and throw off the balance with separate articles. There are some photos of the Eames House at that article and the Commons, maybe one should be added to this article. dv dv dv d 02:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fair use rationale for Image:Charles and Ray Eames-Silhouettes-Communications primer 256kb.mp4.jpg

    Image:Charles and Ray Eames-Silhouettes-Communications primer 256kb.mp4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

    Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

    If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

    BetacommandBot (talk) 21:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Article renamed, equally importance

    I think both were designers and as such should be given equal importance. The article would be renamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.38.122 (talk) 01:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Eames Category?

    It seems to me that there should be a Charles and Ray Eames category. Does anyone have a rationale not to create one? If no comments to the contrary in a few days, then I'm just going to make one. KConWiki (talk) 05:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Separate articles?

    Should this article be split into two separate ones? I suppose it depends largely on how notable Ray Eames is in her own right, I guess. What do you think? Sound off below. 69.179.180.159 (talk) 00:04, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]