Talk:Museo di Capodimonte

Architecture Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Museums Mid‑importance

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 articles

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from Museo di Capodimonte was copied or moved into Palace of Capodimonte with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

[Untitled]

I apologize. I thought my statements had been saved when I did my last deletion. I think to say that this entry has two statements that violate neutral point of view.

1) that this is the best collection of Neapolitan art 2) that Neapolitan art is under-appreciated

For the first statement, some other museum might claim they have "better paintings" by Neapolitan artists. I am not saying that many, if not most persons would agree with you; but this happens to be an opinion, regardless of its validity. If you could convert it into a factual statement: "So and So says this is the best collection" and this statement has notability. Or the Neapolitan museum has n (number) of paintings by So and So and So and So, and (footnote), this is more than Prado, Louvre, NGA, Uffizi, etc then you can say its collection is one the largest of masterworks.

The second statement is true but only relative to say Florentine art or Venetian art. And it is only true according to those who think Italian art has more merit, than say the art of Hungary or Nepal or Malawi. There are those that might way that Neapolitan art gets too much attention relative to the art of Inuits. Again it violates NPOV (neutral point of view) and is an opinion. I am not going to change it again. I tend to agree with you within the parameters stated above, but again, I also recognize it is my opinion. CARAVAGGISTI 20:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough! I have certainly seen both statements in good sources, & the next time I spot them will change the text to reference them. I think "under-appreciated relative to other Italian schools" is understood - it does not say it is the only, or most, under-appreciated art. Johnbod 20:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion on 28 July 09 to version of 15 July

I think this version is informative and comprehensible, and is better than the machine translation of the Italian page. It might well be worth introducing some of the information from that page, but with some understanding of what it means. I shall try to get round to that at some stage if I am not beaten to it. Grafen (talk) 23:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Grafen (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]