User talk:Amandajm

--'''Attilios''' (talk) 09:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)Hello, Amandajm, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:[reply]

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 25 days may be automatically archived by when more than 12 sections are present.

Thann portal

Well, here it says that the tympana indeed show 150 scenes with 500 figures, but i think the writer mixed it up with the archivolts. There is no way the tympana alone can show so many scenes, while the triple row of (extremely densely sculpted) archivolts certainly can. I think it is tympana = 23 scenes, archivolts = +/- 120 scenes, life-size statues around = +/- 10 scenes. The portal is 18 meters high and 8 meters wide, which is quite astonishing given that the church, although very ornate, is rather small. Cheers, --RCS (talk) 19:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy now :-)? (will be expanded). --RCS (talk) 10:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

		The Minor Barnstar
		Thank you, Amandajm, for your attention to detail. Your efforts to improve the oft-overlooked lead section of many featured article candidates has made the articles much more appealing. Karanacs (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed while reading through FAC today that you've helped quite a few of the current candidates to improve their introductory sentences. This is a piece of the article that is usually given little notice, and I was so pleased to see that someone is actually paying attention to it!! I hope we see you at FAC for a long time :) Karanacs (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Darwin: "concluded" vs "realised"

As requested, I've left another message on the talk page, supporting the change. Not sure that it will have any effect though! As a relatively new editor, I find the NPOV requirement on Wikipedia to be "more honoured in the breach than the observance".

I have found it difficult to write neutrally (years of being a University lecturer have instilled a more didactic frame of mind!), but fully accept the desirability of doing so. Unfortunately, my experience is that when I ask genuine questions on talk pages in the hope of gaining a better understanding of this issue, the responses are more often hostile than informative. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I expected, I see that the change has been reverted. Sigh... I don't think one word is worth arguing about, given the massive POV issues elsewhere. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St. Jerome

Yes, I effectively replaced the image of St. Jérome for 2 right reasons. 1. colors are more faithful to the painting - 2. picture have higher resolution. Have a nice day Oxx O 11:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St. Peter's Basilica

OK, it doesn't matter, theses add-ons were only propositions :-). Thanks for your explanation, anyway. --Myrabella (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chichester Cathedral Choir

The Cathedral Choir sings 8 sevices a week - evensong on every day except wednesday, + eucharist and mattins on Sunday. Thursday evensong is men's voices and Friday is unaccompanied. Wednesday is the choir dumb day, so the choir don't sing, but sometimes there are visiting choirs from schools/churches is the area —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnd177 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry

Look, I didn't realise that chopping of info totally was a form of total vandalism (Renaissance architecture). Yes, possibly I should have discussed it more. I apologise for the inconeveniencies. Also, I know what you mean by not copying and pasting info, but also understand that firstly it was not all copy and pasted and second of all, don't you think it's a bit odd that Italy, the homeland of renaissance architecture doesn't even have a seperate page? I mean, France has far less an influence in Renaissance architecture, but it does have a page. So, it seems a bit strange. Since I don't know incredible amounts on Italian renaissance architecture, I know most of it was copypasted, but couldn't you improve it so it's even longer and not copypasted. And anyway, how do you redirect? Reply as soon as possible.--Theologiae (talk) 09:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Facade

I've no particular preference myself, I just wanted the article to be consistent. I'll go and remove the cedillas later. William Avery (talk) 10:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Italian architecture?

Since, presumably, you know a lot on Italian architecture, I was wondering whether it would be appropriate to start a "Italian architecture" page, since all the page is now is a category page. Surely Italian architecture is amongst the most influential in the world, and it's odd that it doesn't even have an article on it! Reply as soon as possible--Theologiae (talk) 15:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My new edits... a Christmas gift needed

Ciao Nonna! Before leaving for my Christmas holidays, I give you my best wishes and ask you help for my last, rushy additions (The Triumph of Death (Palermo), Palazzo Abatellis, Santa Maria della Catena). Thanks and merry Christmas from --'''Attilios''' (talk) 10:15, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

merry New Year to you too! Buon anno anche a te... in the meantime I've added (shame on me!!):

What to say? You entirely rewrote the article and made it FAR better... Thaaaaaaank you.... --'''Attilios''' (talk) 22:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In which meaning Santa Maria in Strada is loose? --'''Attilios''' (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao Manda! As per your request...

- "Hut-shaped" is when it has trapezoidal shape with the pointed vertex upwards, and vertical sides as usual.
- Height of the belltower: that's what was written in the original article!

A presto!! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 14:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo da Vinci

I am working on this article as you are and I would like to see it become a FA very soon. It has changed a lot since it was delisted from FA and I think it is close to meeting the criteria. I will be finishing fixing all the references soon and I would like you to right a list if issues and thigs to do/fix that we can both work on. I hope we will have a good collaborationMephiston999 (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed on an article in wikipedia once that when you split up the references in to references, notes and bibliography, you can create a link between the refs directly to the book in the bibliography. This way when you go on the references and you only find the author and date of pubblication, you click on it and it brings to the corresponding bibliography section with the whole book reference. it would be great to be able to do this with our article as well. can you please check to see if this is possible. Mephiston999 (talk) 19:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My condolences for this terrible tragedy! Sometimes (I don't know if it's a Safari thing) when I hit the back button right after that happens to me, all the text I wrote before hitting "save page" will still be in my edit window. I quickly copy it all and paste it after reloading the page. Obviously it's too late for that, but I'm with you in spirit!—DMCer™ 04:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

check this article John Diefenbaker to see the reference thing i was talking about, it looks great doesn't it? Mephiston999 (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manchester Cathedral

Can you explain this to me? It says in the intro that the cathedral has "flat fan-vaulted ceilings". What is mean by this? There is a fan vault under the tower. Do the aisles also have fan vaults, and can they be reasonably described as "flat"? Has the writer unknowingly confused some mention of the tower vault with the flat wooden arch-braced ceiling? Amandajm (talk) 14:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

the only fan vault is the one within the tower. All the other vessels have low-pitch wooden roofs, that of the nave being supported by the famous "angel orchestra". The church as we now see it was rebuilt by the Stanley's (the Earls of Derby) after they had struck rich by backing Henry VII at the Battle of Bosworth (and by Thomas Stanley marrying the Kings mother, Margert Beaufort). In effect, the Manchester college became a sort of secondary Windsor or Chapel Royal, which is how it survived the Reformation as a collegiate corporation. TomHennell (talk) 15:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TomHennell"

Leon da V

Just looked in on the page - History page shows no names but yours! A housewife-art historian's work is never done?

Hope all is going good and best wishes for 2010. PiCo (talk) 00:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stained glass/gemmail

Hi Amanda- Marcmaison, (another editor, I presume) has restored AzitaS' material to Stained glass. Neither of the references cited supports Picasso having created works in gemmail. Since you know this stuff better than I, would you look at it? I think it'd be better if I didn't revert the same material twice. Eric ^talk 14:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit there. I stumbled on this and Gemmaux at the same time. I'm proposing the latter be changed to Gemmail: Talk:Gemmaux#Article_title/Merge_to_Gemmail? Eric ^talk 14:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amanda and thanks for fattening up baby Gemmail. FYI: Talk:Gemmail#Marcmaison.2C_aka_Antoine_delorme.2C_aka_AzitaS.3F Eric ^talk 22:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Amanda,

Actually Picasso never realized any window in traditional stained glass as you rightly point out above. The Gemmaux technique being an innovative form of stained glass, we can certainly refer to Picasso as being one of the most prolific artist in this medium. Indeed he has produced about 50 Gemmaux between 1954 and 1956 in collaboration with Roger and Roland Malherbe-Navarre who perfected this technique by creating transparent enamel. Many other famous artists such as Matisse, Van Dongen and Braque created gemmaux and the first exhibition of their work took place in Paris in 1957. Thereafter an exhibition titled 'Les Gemmaux de France' was organized to show the gemmaux in the United States. The first exhibition took place in NY at the Corning Glass Museum and then at the Metropolitan Museum. The exhibit then toured the major American Museum between 1959 and 1961. A retrospective exhibition was held at the prestigious Galerie Charpentier in 1964 in Paris. I could provide a photo of one of Picasso’s gemmail, which would greatly enhance the description. What do you think?

I hope these references will help:

Poster of the exhibition of the Gemmaux at the Galerie Charpentier in 1964

[1]

Article of the Time : A new Art

[2]

Signature of Picasso "a new art is born : Gemmaux"

[3]
[4]

Encyclopedia Britannica

[5]

--AzitaS (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amanda. All the Gemmaux are original artworks designed and signed by Picasso, they are not reproduction. When Picasso discovered this new technique he decided to reinterpret his paintings in this medium, it was his choice. . He worked during 2 years with the gemmist to produce about 50 gemmaux, they differ in size from the oil paintings. . Although unknown, the Gemmaux are part of Picasso's life and artwork. I am sending you 2 interesting pictures.

Maya Picasso in front of a Gemmail of his father

Signature of Pablo Picasso : a new art is born : Gemmaux

--AzitaS (talk) 16:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]