This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio articles
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 articles
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
This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Disagree, works of art, especially notable ones such as this, deserve their own page.
In that case, should there just be a section on the Cubis series instead of a single work? Although there's a need to expand the David Smith entry to reflect such importance.
I could see a page being created to describe the entire series, but I don't think that individual pages created for the more culturally signifigant pieces should be disallowed. So, I respectfully disagree. AriGold17:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. Properly fleshed-out, this page is going to crowd the limits for how long a page should be. Merging the Cubis series into this article would make it excessively long. ClairSamoht23:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. Works of art and their respective artists should have separate pages, unless the artist is known solely for that particular creation. Since that is clearly not the case with Smith, the articles should be kept separate. However, I would advocate merging any future detailed information about other Cubis with Cubi XXVIII to create a solitary article about the series (similarly with his other series, if they accumulate enough information). Bastin823:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Big Gap
There seem to be a big gap in the beginning of the article due to the the side notes on the right... Is there anyway to fix this? If so, please do so. -- 6:21pm EST December 3, 2008
