Jump to content

User talk:Freshacconci

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Filmdoctor1 (talk | contribs) at 21:25, 4 January 2013. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please click here to leave me a new message. Please sign your message with ~~~~ or I will not respond.
Archive

Archives

10/2006-04/2007
05/2007-07/2007
08/2007-11/2007
12/2007-05/2008
06/2008-11/2008
12/2008-08/2009
09/2009-12/2009
01/2010-09/2010
10/2010-03/2011
04/2011-12/2011

T.M.Ananny

File:Canadian Winter.JPG 2001 web small.jpg
Merry Christmas, Freshacconci, Ho ho ho! The gift that keeps on giving.

Here we go again... Looks like it's been there for the last two weeks, even. Cheers, Lithoderm 05:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, good. Just when things were becoming dull. Thanks for the heads-up. freshacconci talktalk 06:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, what do you think we should do about these pictures? Ananny released them under creative commons licenses, but she's only going to use them to keep spamming articles. We can't exactly delete them on copyright grounds, but still... hmmm. Lithoderm 00:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I could throw her a bone and keep this image on my talkpage (oh, and thanks for that, btw). Hey, she made it onto Wikipedia! As for deleting the images, I have no idea what the policy is. I'm sure I've seen plenty of images that are floating around without articles. freshacconci talktalk 01:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Civility and TheScotch

Just to let you know, I have left a message on TheScotch's talk page reiterating what I said on the "Eight Miles High" discussion page. There really is no excuse for that kind of name calling. I wish I hadn't been so pleasant on the "Walk Away Renee" talk page now. :-( --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 13:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've dealt with TheScotch for years. Here he's editing as an IP (I was able to figure out that this was him) on the Burt Bacharach article in 2007 with some charming edit summaries. And here he is "agreeing" with the IP's edits (I've always assumed that he and the IP were the same person since they write in the same condescending manner and TheScotch was quick to write the response defending the IP). It's also gratifying that he was quite incorrect in his opinion on the issue. Not that it changed his mind or attitude or anything. freshacconci talktalk 14:20, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear...he does seem rather brusque and ill-tempered, doesn't he? I'll probably get a tirade of abuse for daring to admonish him on his own talk page, but hopefully not. Hopefully he'll see that there's no need for name calling. After all, we're all here for the same purpose ultimately. I have to say, I think that some of the points he makes concerning the "Walk Away Renee" article are correct, such as the erroneous use of the word obbligato, but other changes he makes just seem to be change for changes sake to me, and not edits that necessarily improve the syntax or grammar of an article. That's just my opinion though. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 14:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glitch art

Would you care to explain your twinkling? Thx, --Webmgr (talk) 15:19, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation was in the edit summary. This is some guy's cv and serves no purpose other than as spam. freshacconci talktalk 16:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious to know why you feel the mention of the GLI.TC/H conference in Chicago (and later in Amsterdam and Birmingham) isn't particularly important (glitch art > history > 22:10, 6 December 2011‎ ). The GLI.TC/H conference has featured the works of over 100 glitch artists over the last two years (with hundreds of people in attendance), has released a book of essays on the subject (published by unsorted books ISBN: 978-4-9905200-1-4) and has been a source online and offline for the sharing of glitch art and ideas and the networking of artists and enthusiasts from all over the world. I find this strange considering you don't have a problem with mentioning the event in Oslo, for which there exists very little documentation. If you were to query glitch artists and enthusiasts on any of the online groups (flickr, vimeo, facebook) I think you'd find very few of them know anything about the small event in Oslo, but the vast majority are aware of GLI.TC/H, and likely even attended or participated in one of the events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.78.3.131 (talk)

WPA pronunciation?

(Reverted 1 edit by 81.68.255.36 (talk): Sorry, that's an WPA pronounciation; we can't go by your opinion. (TW))

I have never heard of WPA pronunciation, nor does the link you provided clear things up. I know IPA and SAMPA, but not that one. What is it? In any case, the pronunciation uses IPA symbols, therefore giving the wrong pronunciation in its current form. It now says something like 'deh steel', it should be 'duh style' more or less. The difference is obvious. Please clarify. 81.68.255.36 (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of artists who have recorded "Jingle Bells"

There's a discussion over on my talkpage about this strange closure. Anything you want to add? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 23:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrate

A toast - Freshacconci - Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, Happy Hanukah, lets hope it's a good one! and keep on keeping on...Modernist (talk) 13:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice: Filing Of Complaint To Wikipedia About Your Continual Slander To A Living Person.

I AM FILING A COMPLAINT AGAINST FRESHACCONCI TO THE WIKIPEDIA FOUNDATION.

YOU HAVE CONTINUALLY BROKEN WIKIPEDIA POLICY WITH YOUR NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RAMON AYALA, A LIVING PERSON.

I Copied & Pasted Some Of Wikipedias Policies Of Biographies Of A Living Person, In Case That You Are Not Aware Of Them.

THE FOLLOWING:

Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives, and the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to BLPs, including any living person mentioned in a BLP even if not the subject of the article, and to material about living persons on other pages.[3] The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material.

How to complain to the Wikimedia FoundationIf you are not satisfied with the response of editors and admins to a concern about biographical material about living persons, you can ask the Foundation's team of volunteers for help. Please e-mail info-en-q@wikimedia.org with a link to the article and details of the problem; for more information on how to complain, see here. See here for how to contact the Wikimedia Foundation.

If you are concerned about the accuracy or appropriateness of biographical material on Wikipedia, report problems at the biographies of living persons noticeboard.

For how to complain to the Wikimedia Foundation, see here and below.Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page.[1] Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies:

We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.[2] Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.

Suburban7 (talk) 02:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC) [1][reply]

Thread about you on Jimbo's talk page

There's a thread about you on Jimbo's talk page. It has, er, limited merit. Just letting you know... Egg Centric 19:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eight Miles High

Hi Freshacconci! I don't suppose you have anything to add to the on-going discussion on the "Eight Miles High" talk page, regarding the paragraph dealing with Gene Clark's departure, do you? There's an IP user who is unhappy with certain aspects of it. Your input would be most welcomed. Frankly, I've said all I've got to say and can't be bothered wasting any more time on such a trivial matter. Many thanks. -- Kohoutek1138 (talk) 03:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adirondack Chair

Hi Freshacconci,

I wanted to discuss with you more about my edit you reverted on the Adirondack Chair page. The source of the information was "The Adirondack Chair" by Daniel Mack. I believe the comparison to de Stijl be accurate, not specious. I respect your contributions and would like to better understand why the information is irrelevant to the article.

Thank you!

Jasonhdavis (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch

over at Sculpture Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 04:56, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Twomorerun

Hi. I wanted to point you to this page in my user space, where I'm accumulating information about this user. I still have to add diffs and clean it up, but feel feel to contribute if you're interested. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've filed at AN/I [1] Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neoclassicism

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Neoclassicism". Thank you. --203.109.211.160 (talk) 15:29, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a discussion taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 04:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

To Freshacconci.

Wikipedia is not just yours to edit. It is for everyone. Who said I cannot edit the Beatles?! Everyone can edit the Beatles. When I see things that are wrong I go and change things. Not everything is fine the way is it you know. Especially if it is your interferencing. Wikipedia is for everyone. EVERYONE!!! If I want to edit I can. It is not your right to tell people what we can and can't do.

P.S. This does not just go to you; it goes to everybody.

Thank you ```` User: Rdudle (talk) 10:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Death of John Lennon

Hello my name is helter1 The corrections I made to the death of John Lennon are correct. I can discuss this and back it up with original sources and not with error filled book accounts of the incident.

thanks

Helter1 (talk) 00:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I do wonder

why I bother with all this. I should pick an obscure topic and focus on that. freshacconci talktalk 01:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why the use of ROLLBACK

Why the use of ROLLBACK at my user talk page? — Cirt (talk) 00:36, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have no idea what happened. The only thing I can think of is I was trying to rollback something else on my watch list and hit your talk page instead. Sorry about that--I should have checked the results of he rollback but was obviously in a hurry. I still have no idea what I was trying to actually rollback. freshacconci talktalk 00:56, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, honest mistake, no worries! ;) — Cirt (talk) 05:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

... for clearing the nastiness from my Talk page. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:24, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minimal Art, Frank Stella edit...

Hey man,

Just wanted to give you a heads-up: don't know why you reverted the change I made last night to the portion of the minimal art page that incorrectly called Frank Stella's "Black Paintings" his "pinstripe" paintings, but Stella specifically abhorred this designation and critics haven't used it since the early 60's. There are no pinstripes in the pieces. The white lines are actually untreated canvas; the only paint used is black enamel in the stripes (unless you're talking about "Delta," (1958) which used red but wasn't a part of the 16 Americans show).

Also, the rest of that section makes some pretty dubious claims that I didn't bother fixing.

108.21.2.47 (talk) 02:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dperp (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)Wiki Page for Feng Zhengjie

Hi there, Thank you for your responsible reaction about me editing the page! I am doing this edition for my History of Chinese Art class. I am from China and English is not my native language. The time given for this project is very limited so that I will not be able to translate all of this into English. If I edit this page, could you please allow it to exist at least 2 days so that I am able to show my teacher what I did? Thank you very much and looking forward to doing some thorough editing in the summer on Feng Zhengjie! Dperp (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Cardell Corbet

What true evidence have you that there are close connections tied to Corbet/colleagues, etc and his Wiki page? From what I see you are obsessed with him and his work...a wee bit worrying...Belovedsarniacherie (talk) 02:39, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The conflict of interest is addressed on the article talk page. freshacconci talktalk 03:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP Visual Arts in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Visual Arts for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:47, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail Art

Why have you undone the additions to the Mail Art External Links? You've reverted to a few dead or dormant links that I was trying to remedy. Michael Lumb's universtity thesis on Mail Art is no longer available at Fortune City, it is available at the link I added. You restored a link to Greg Byrd's Mail Art Calls/projects page. This information hasn't been updated for over a year whereas the Mail Art Projects and Mail-Art Forum links i added are up to date and current. I'd like to add a few other current Mail Art links too, is this going to be a problem? Keithbates51 (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Johnson actually spelled his creation as 'correspondance' (sic), it was one of his famous wordplays - http://www.rayjohnson.org/tags/the-correspondance-school Keithbates51 (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disinformation Agents

Please continue to promote false reality/consensus reality; therefore furthering the agenda of deceiving the people.

Wikipedia only accepts Consensus Reality "references". Any reference material that is deemed out of the box or controversial is deemed "not valid" by the mindless disinformation agents who swarm this psy-op. The day will come when True information is available to humanity and not censored by the thought-police.

Information that makes the censors "hot and bothered" should be reviewed thoroughly. Things are not what they seem, brother. Wake up, please.

If you are interested in what is really going on, please review the information available on such site that you deem "invalid" (such as: http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/index.html ) nd perform the necessary research maneuvers and activite both the left and right hemispheres of the brain, then try your best to understand that you are a slave to the consensus/false reality and are enforcing the agenda. If not, pleasant dreaming.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.174.143 (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cute. freshacconci talktalk 01:23, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

maya deren reverted edits

Hi, just curious as to why you reverted everything on the Maya Deren page? thanks Miniphor1 (talk) 06:54, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what happened. I don't recall reverting your changes. I must have hit rollback by mistake as I don't think your changes were incorrect. On the contrary, I've been watching the progress on the article and think your edits were useful. Sorry for the confusion. I've reverted my edit. freshacconci talktalk 13:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Net.art

Thanks for your request of reliables sources for my change in Net.art (introduction of the [Poietic Generator]].

The reasons of the change is here : Talk:Poietic_Generator.

As I mentioned it, the Poietic Generator was up and running before the Net.art mouvement. Sources can be found here :

The Poietic Generator was also involved in typical events related to Net.art

And it still exist after the so called "death of Net.art":

Urfortunately, I didn't find any external source witch mention all the facts mentionned in the wikipedia article Poietic Generator... So, What sould we do ?--Toudou (talk) 13:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

184.148.31.23

Hi. Who is the banned user you're reverting? I'm trying to decide whether it's appropriate to put {{bannedmeansbanned}} on the talk page, or just report them. Thanks. Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 20:37, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is something that has been going on for years. The whole thing is outlined here: [2]. Basically, it's a long-term spammer who has now moved on to posting her images on several articles. She usually uses different IPs--I just noticed she's changed IP yet again in the last several minutes. She's a real nuisance. freshacconci talktalk 20:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I just saw that (edit conflicted with you). I'm just about to open a ban proposal on WP:AN, because I didn't see anywhere that s/he is formally banned yet, just blocked. Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 20:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your revert at Muhandes talk page

This edit removed the structure/new section and modified language added by Wikinj321 on Mujandes' talk page. I didnt understand why u reverted it, when the most that was required was removing the excess signing. I thought of reverting your action, but felt it better to talk to you first about it. Thanks! Anir1uph (talk) 00:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I'm not sure what happened as I had no intention of reverting your edits. I was on an iPad and sometimes those are tricky to edit with. I must have hit revert by mistake. Sorry for the mix-up. I've reverted myself. In case you're new to Wikipedia, editors should rarely, if ever, revert another editor's comments on a talk page without a really good reason. If it happens again, whether it's me (hopefully not) or someone else, you should restore your edit right away and then ask why your comments were altered. It's bad etiquette to do that intentionally and sloppy to do it by accident. freshacconci talktalk 01:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey hey! it was not my edit, it was Wikinj321's edit that you reverted. Muhandes' talk page happens to be on my watch-list, and that topic is of interest to me, so i looked into it. And that is why i preferred to inform you about it, and not revert it myself! Thanks and cheers! :) Anir1uph (talk) 01:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sgt. Pepper straw poll

There is currently a straw poll taking place here. Your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kitsch Movement

Perhaps you should read the texts associated with kitsch philosophy before editing this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitschpainter (talk • contribs) 15:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You of course have no idea what I've read or haven't read. Insisting that kitsch artists are not artists is unsourced original research. "Artist" is the general name used for any practitioner of visual arts. Even if some kitsch artists prefer not to use the word "artist", this has nothing to do with Wikipedia. If there are reliable and third-party sources that discuss this sort of issue, that can be added to the article. However, we don't change basic terminology used throughout Wikipedia based on a very local and specific preference. freshacconci talktalk 15:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


If what you say is true concerning artists, then truth would also have it that the header should read Artists rather than Kitschists. See Law of Identity (Aristotle). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitschpainter (talk • contribs) 16:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's very cute. In any case, what the header says or doesn't say isn't the issue. It's an article on the so-called Kitsch movement, so either "Kitschists" or "artists" is sufficient (as would "Impressionists" in the Impressionism article). What you're attempting to do is argue semantics over something quite fundamental. In English we identify the makers of visual arts as artists. They can be called all sorts of other things, but since we are talking about a general description, identifying them as artists is the most reasonable and neutral. You or I have no idea of knowing whether artists working in media other than painting or sculpture could become part of this movement. What if someone uses pencil or crayon or photography? The main issue however is that you are now edit warring and that is something that can get you blocked. Argue your case on the article talk page but I can pretty much guarantee that without some good sources, you will find it difficult to make this case. freshacconci talktalk 16:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If changing "painters and sculptors" (other acceptable identifiers in English) to "artists" is appropriate, then why not change the header from Kitschists to Artists as well? Perhaps your edits reveal your preference to the term artists because you are an artist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitschpainter (talk • contribs) 16:36, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't understand what I'm saying, I'm really at a loss on how to make it any clearer: "artist" is general and neutral. Anyway, please take this discussion off my talk page and onto the article talk page where it belongs. freshacconci talktalk 17:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ananny again

I seem to have stumbled into a long-lived sockpuppeteer User:Ananny that you are familiar with.

User:Criteriart and User:Canadianwikipics have uploaded the following images by Terry Ananny to Commons, claiming "Own Work":

The files are tagged as possible copyright violations, but now that I've found Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Ananny it seems more likely the files were uploaded by the banned user. So, do the files stay up? There seems to be no provision to speedy a file on the grounds that it was uploaded by a banned user. Seems very strange to me.

This is at least the third time I've noticed artwork by Ananny being uploaded and dumped into articles, but I've only now discovered her history.

IP 184.148.29.21 added images to Ice skating, Birthday. and Party, but that only covers two of the images, so there are probably other IPs too. I'm not familiar with the SPI board, so if you want to take care of reporting this have at it. Meters (talk) 03:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I actually don't know anything about the commons or how those rules work. I'll see what I can do. I keep seeing her images pop into articles but they're difficult to trace from various IPs. And she no longer users her name to identify the work, just credits it to a "Canadian Artist". She's also tried adding unrelated text to Pop art along with an image hoping it will go unnoticed. Pretty shameless. She may become famous after all but not for the reasons she would like to. She's definitely one of the worst spammers/self-promoters I've every come across on Wikipedia. If she wasn't wasting so many editors' time it would be mildly amusing. But I find it despicable, frankly. freshacconci talktalk 17:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, she buries her name in the file description but it doesn't show up in the articles the images are used in. That's why I at first assumed that they must be copyright violations. What artist would freely license her works but hide her name? The next time I see one of these I'll immediately revert as a sock of a banned user. I still can't believe that there seems to be no policy or guideline to stop a banned user from uploading files. Meters (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Corbet

I'm questioning your rather odd if not concerning interest in the career of Christian Corbet. You seem to focus on him a great deal...why? Some actions by other parties in the past have led people to receive advice from council concerning their behaviours. This is not a threat but fact that is all I'm saying.Belovedsarniacherie (talk) 23:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it sounds like a legal threat. freshacconci talktalk 23:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And it appears you've already been blocked for making threats. freshacconci talktalk 23:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned on the talk page, I believe that the Christian Cardell Corbet article is being heavily trolled by information meant to cover with ridicule the subject of the article in question. What should one do to efficiently protect it? 87.64.169.61 (talk) 22:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Prudence / Andy Sheppard jazz cover

I find it a bit odd that you deleted this addition to the list of covers of "Dear Prudence". Why didn't you simply delete the link if its presence was problematic? The cover version by a highly respected and influential jazz musician is a fact, and your reference list is now incomplete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misij123 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

amazing edits, however wanted to just let you know for visual artists the image photo can be artwork

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper_Johns

as the most notable example. Keep up the superb work, and any additional suggestions are welcome please!

amazing edits, however wanted to just let you know for visual artists the image photo can be artwork

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper_Johns

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

as the most notable example. Keep up the superb work, and any additional suggestions are welcome please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tron77 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are others too but the infobox should only be a photo of the person not examples of artwork. Also, if you are using more than one account to edit, you should stick to one or else you could get blocked from editing. freshacconci talktalk 14:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Razors and badges..

Hi Editor Sorrh ou Modom..

Razor - good stuff..I have several putative players in the biz who feel the necessity to establish an Inet profile..They already have REPUTATIONS..

Then there are musicians who use such Tosh as Hello Montreal etc because Janis Joplin did.. They wanna be STARS..

I try to cut across this in my work and my life and my work..

I say Echo Narcissus and practitioners whose life and works are based on The Greek School Of Mathematics leave the room..I mention Faith and a whole generation thinks I'm barmy.. I am not mad , I am outraged at clearly resistible Societal Change..WE have a 4/4 Disco / Karaoke culture , which produces Monoculture..Not Good..and I like Disco..

I can spot a Charlatan after a few sniffs..

Hope you like my contributions..

All the best , Chris Willey OTM Records UK / Out Of Stroud

82.132.249.200 (talk) 14:49, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Words fail me. freshacconci talktalk 15:24, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lou Reed and 8 Miles High..

Lou Reed... I was trying to add to the debate with a practitioners perspective..hopefully a sharp and accurate and amusing one..You wanna get a great song that resonates through Time (and get some $$$s through Covers )..you go for The Haunt..transcends mediums, engineering parameters, specific languages..Songs get hummed, whistled ALL OVER.. That is My Craft..

8 Miles High..

Is a great Song about Alienation..anywhere in the known universe..

Stoned Americans wishing to create a Stir with a Sound and a Look..they succeeded.. Gene Clark , like Gram Parsons , was never less than excellent ..when able to stand, sit and consume his feed..Mr Jim ( no sorry Subud Roger ) Sang the song..Front man..now LIVES OFF IT LIKE THE CIRCUS ACT HE IS..that is not a criticism.. Circus is good..

Jagger - a Dartford Warbler and Ferry - a sleek Newcastle Brown were about FASHION..as is Bowie..They are FANS who love many Art Forms - were also after the same girlie like Eric Clapton & George..

Zimmerman toodled Caustic Ironic Rhyme all over his playmates and can now see every Narcissistic Schticke except his own..

They set Sonic Art Patterns.. Robert Wyatt is Something Else , as is Ishmael Reed..Eddie Cochran was The cataclysmic pop musical event..Tony Joe White followed.others..thousands of them were Slower Burners.. Chris Willey (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2012 (UTC) bw CW[reply]

Points of View..clarifications

Chat room or a place where knowledge is enhanced  ?

Correspondance on the 8 Miles High line does appear to become vituperative..a chat room scenario does develop ..egos clash..you are the landlord..you can and do turf 'em out.. It is your ball, your park.. You got it REGISTERED..

If I offer a benign attempt to throw light on a topic , it is with the aim of enhancing awareness..insight about process..better next step..

We have a SERIOUS problem going on as a species about CLAIMS & TERRITORY..

Vigorous debate is One Way through..

Moderation is overrated..

bw CW — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Willey (talk • contribs) 03:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Ian carr-harris 137 tecumseth.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ian carr-harris 137 tecumseth.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Montreal

Well the sources on the page for Kinshasa seem to contradict the statement on the Montreal page. The one source on the Kinshasa page is newer than the book source of Monteal. Also one of the sources for the Montreal page's claims says "Western world" which is why I changed it to that. If you think that we shouldn't be using that term, then why even have that source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anawrahta (talk • contribs) 15:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where that source in the Kinshasa article states that Kinshasa is the second largest French city. It states that it has a population of 8 million but makes no other claim. I skimmed it so I could be wrong but it does not appear to be there. That source further states that French is a minority language, spoken as a second language by 15% of the population nationally. In Montreal French is the majority language and the official language of Quebec. The Montreal article states that it is the second largest French-speaking city in the world, meaning as spoken by the majority of city inhabitants as the main language. Perhaps the wording could be improved and as I said this has been discussed on the talk page. If you have suggestions on how this could be improved you can discuss it there. freshacconci talktalk 16:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About the neomodern facade of a building in Pretoria

Hello Freshacconci :) Please explain me why should an image be discussed in an article in order to be there?! Please check the Facade article. There are several photos there that are not even mentioned in the text, but are - there because they illustrate the subject. Please comment. Thanks in advance. --PretoriaTravel (talk) 11:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Long and Winding Road Edit

I understand why you deleted my edit, and I don't have any source except for our ears and our knowledge classical rock. Please do listen to it yourself, then I think you'll understand why I made the change. This is not a pop song or just a rock song. thank you. After your reply, I'll re - edit again.Phymacheo (talk) 11:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, simply put, if you don't have a source, you cannot add that info to the article. Whether or not you or I "hear" something is irrelevant because that would be original research. You will need to find a published source for that to be included. freshacconci talktalk 11:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of suicides

Hi. Just to clarify, the "non-notable" in question that I referred to in my reversion of the prior edits was Orenthal James (O.J.) Murdock, and not Phyllis Hyman. Thanks for restoring Hyman with the proper cite. It is much appreciated. Nightscream (talk) 02:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help with art collective article? Frustrated

Hi Freshacconci! A Wiki-knowledgable friend recommended contacting editors who had contributed to art collective or art-related pages on Wikipedia in the past to ask for help with my problem. I see from your history that includes you. I'm trying to create a page for the Good/Bad Art Collective which existed in Denton, Texas from 1993-2001, see my efforts here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Good/Bad_Art_Collective It keeps getting rejected. Originally I thought it was too long (at first I listed the collective's major works, and member's names) but then it just seem to boil down to not having "cited sources related to the collective itself" But I don't understand how articles by art reviewers in The Dallas Observer newspaper, The Houston Chronicle and The Village Voice are related to the collective. They are reviews of their work. And, several ex-members have gone onto become famous artists. Plus, I have no relation to Good/Bad and am not or ever was a member. My friend (who used to edit on Wikipedia a lot, mainly the Judy Garland page, but hasn't in a year) suggested contacting someone with a bit more knowledge about art scenes. Looking at the history he thinks it's being rejected by people sticking too-close to Wikipedia rules and current issues, and can't see its relevance beyond that. Just a hunch? I see many other art collectives, even some who existed just a few years ago, have Wikipedia entries that have done far less than Good/Bad ever did. Do you mind taking a look and seeing what you think? Any suggestion you may have would be GREATLY appreciated. This is my first article for Wikipedia, and I'm determined to make it work because I know it's relevant. It was originally much more detailed. Thank for your time! MarkAllen5 (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC) .[reply]

Andy Warhol Edit

I'd like to know why you reverted my edit on the Andy Warhol article. I rewatched that scene in Men In Black 3 seven times, and my version is the correct one. Also, the previous version makes much less sense in the context of the film with Agent W being driven insane by the absurdity of his assignment (note the continuation of the scene where he covers his conversation by saing he is filming K eating a hamburger). -- Anthony S. Castanza (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC) A. S. Castanza[reply]

Finally

I've finally succeeded in getting the entire range that the MoS IP Vandal uses blocked, per this discussion. If he pops up again, just go to this admin; he's already familiar and will take care of it. Cheers. Radiopathy •talk• 04:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jewish American Visual Artists

I added David Zaintz to the list. It was taken off, siting "no article" please explain further. Thank you!

Waveman1 (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Waveman1 (talk) 07:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jewish American Visual Artists

Nevermind. I figured it out. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waveman1 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of Doherty and Goering

Are you being serious! it is a matter of FACT that Pete Doherty is a self confessed user of Heroin and Crack Cocaine. He has been arrested several times for possesion and has been jailed for it, even been the subject of a DRO (Drug Rehab Order). If he was not a Heroin addict, why did he have a Naltrexone implant fitted? for fun? and as for Goering, that is also well noted, he was the smack head of the nazis. Il put it back in when i get chance to add all of the 1000+ refs for Dohertys heroin use.Markdarrly (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's all well-noted then it should be easy for you to find sources which we require per WP:BLP in the case of Doherty. freshacconci talktalk 18:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:108.25.110.188

Hello, thanks for dealing with the IP who was giving out personal attacks. I have one question though, why did you restore the removed comments? -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 03:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Far-left politics

From GeorgePierBain (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this message is from the person who has been inserting the new section "The Far Right in America" into the article. Needless to say, the IP is not fake. I understand that this back and forth with the editing must be frustrating, and I sincerely apologize. Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, but I wish to do this properly from now on. As for the content of what I have attempted to add, it is accurate - and I will explain why. In the past, groups in the USA that can arguably be described as far-right have met the description given in the current version of the article. Today, any such groups have been marginalized to the point of insignificance. Where any individual lies on the political spectrum in the USA depends primarily on where he or she stands on the relationship between the individual and the state. On this American spectrum, therefore, Fascism is far to the left of mainstream liberals and conservatives. Without the distinction made clear by my section, the article unfairly and innacurately portrays the political views of many people in the United States. If you compare the current versions of the Wikipedia articles "Far-right politics" and "Far-left politics" with a truly objective mind, you will have to see some clear bias. The latter is brief and lacks any mention of the negative aspects of far-left politics, the negative parts of the ideology and of the history. In stark contrast, "Far-right politics" includes genocide, oppression, racism, and xenophobia as essential elements. In fact, these are common elements of far-left politics as well. The article "Far-left politics" does not even include a "History" section! Why is this? As for citations, the general description in "Far-right politics" (contained in the first two paragraphs) includes but one source. And this source is the work of one person who presents his own analysis, something that should not be considered indisputable fact. I can add citations to my own contribution, but they will be just the same; I will have cited the opinion of another who agrees with me. What is very clear is that these two articles must be altered in the interest of fairness and accuracy. I would like to achieve this with anyone whose primary concern is presenting the truth.

GeorgePierBain (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Woodlands style

I am an expert in the woodlands style, I do not own the link that I used to update that page.

I personally knew Norvall Morriseau, he was a close friend of my family, I own various pieces of his work. I have several books on the subject. I also know his apprentices. This was not a random edit, but an updating with regards to the new generation of artists following his footsteps.

Please take the time to undertake some research before engaging in vandalizing my edits on this subject. I do not edit wikipedia a lot, but when I do it is with expertise and knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warisart (talk • contribs) 17:10, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The website you attempted to list was not a proper source and was in fact spam as it was a commercial site. I really don't care if you knew Morriseau or not. It's irrelevant. If I hadn't removed the link someone else would have. You should read the links I provided on spamming and what count as legitimate sources. As for "undertaking research" in this matter it was quite simple: I clicked on the link you provided and found it was not suitable for Wikipedia. Do not accuse other editors of vandalism for legitimate edits, such as removing spam. Please read and understand WP:CIVIL along with WP:SPAM and WP:RS. freshacconci talktalk 19:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

image

In fact, we are French students. Our English is not very good. We are trying to put some elements on wikipedia about Laurent Gervereau. He is a specialist of images, artist, novelist, philosopher... He had works in many subjects. We just would like to put some elements in thoses subjects and if the wikipedia community wants to know more, they may have a look to his websites, movies or books

We don't want to just "redo" what is deleted. But it is not normal for wiki to have no elements at all about these works, this is not scientific. Could you help us ?

Many thanks

PlurofuturoPlurofuturo (talk) 15:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Freshacconci,

I answer to all of you, many thanks for helping.

Generally, we feel quite strange that wikipedia in English ignores important aspects of non English speaking other countries. So that is why we begin to try to improve it with other friends (students).

Well, for the example of Laurent Gervereau, I heard what you said. So, I will write some short words only for 4 subjects directly connected (we could take also for him literature, Art, politics, cinema, photography...) with references : political ecology, history of art, image, philosophy

Then, please help me Francophonie & Androphilie to read it and to put it in a better English

Many thanks

PlurofuturoPlurofuturo (talk) 09:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Valueyou

what do you make of all this: [3][4][5]. Hyacinth seems to think something is amiss (see edit summary), I tend to agree. How should we address this matter? Semitransgenic talk. 19:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image and History of Art

I rewrited everything and put the ISBN of the sources. This information is really important for the theory of both subjects: there is only one World Dictionnary of Images in the World. it would be shocking if nobody speaks about this main question of borders today

Maybe my English is not very good...

Many thanks

PlurofuturoPlurofuturo (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From a fan

why on earth wouldnt you want additions to artist names when they were included and done in a professional manner? meanwhile you sit in peoria pontificating? your reversion i consider vandalism. who are you and why do you think you are the end all in the art world? are you a failed artist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artstarnyc (talk • contribs) 01:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oh, i get it. if they were artists in toronto maybe you would consider them real. let me remind you freshmacoroni, new york is a center of the art world, like paris? youre just some kid, go back to art school!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artstarnyc (talk • contribs) 01:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Legal Aid Ontario page

Hello,

Why did you delete the entire criticism section that had been in this article for some time and is referenced?

Also, you stated that you deleted my edits because they "would fall under original research as the source is a primary source", but my only edits were (1) fixing the omitted word "page" in the sentence "In February, 2008, the organization was criticized in an 87 report by the Ontario Ombudsman for a mishandling of funds in the legal defence of Richard Wills." and (2) fixing 2 omitted commas. I will say that I should have marked my edits as minor edits.

Nottrulyrandom (talk) 23:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reinstated the criticism section as I can only assume that you deleted it by accident.

Nottrulyrandom (talk) 16:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain

Can you please explain why some Canadian provinces must have a French translation on their Wiki pages???? Even for those Canadian provinces that don't have French as the official language (i.e. British Columbia)???? I don't even understand why British Columbia Wiki page must have a French translation "la Colombie-Britannique, C.-B."???? (You had to re-instate my edit back to your version, is it because you were born in Montreal???? But the majority of the BC population don't need French at all, nor the stupid bilingual labels the Federal government decided to print/enforce, such a waste of taxpayers money)

It may make sense for Quebec and New Brunswick to have the French translation because both provinces declare English and French as their official languages. But that also creates a lot of hardship for the English speakers who can't find a job because they can't speak French!?!?!? And a lot of them have to leave the province and seek jobs somewhere else.

Bilingualism actually lead to Job segregation/alienation/discrimination, whatever you call it. Just look at this hospital located in Ottawa, Canada, all Jobs are French-only and it creates a hardship for the English speaking people who won't be able to work in such hospital. For Gods sake, it's a hospital in Ottawa, Canada!!!! And it's French-only!!!! Isn't it crazy!?!? http://www.hopitalmontfort.com/index.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatchewan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newfoundland_and_Labrador

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_Scotia Nova Scotia Nouvelle-Écosse (French) Alba Nuadh (Gaelic)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Edward_Island Île-du-Prince-Édouard (French)

You have to also realize that the English language had become the "common" language for all nations worldwide for everyone to communicate effectively in trades and businesses, science and medicine, research and development.

You also have to realize that a "language" is a "political tool", and what's the point of having a French translation for the province of British Columbia where 99% of the people speak English, and they all came from all ethnic background, namely the (here's the big list):


Cornish, English, Irish, Manx, Scottish, Welsh, British Isles, n.i.e.**, Acadians, French, Inuit, Métis, North American Indian, American, Canadian, Newfoundlander, Nova Scotian, Ontarian, Québécois, Other North American provincial or regional groups, Antiguan, Bahamian, Barbadian, Bermudan, Carib, Cuban, Dominican, n.o.s.***, Grenadian, Guyanese, Haitian, Jamaican, Kittitian/Nevisian, Martinican, Montserratan, Puerto Rican, St. Lucian, Trinidadian/Tobagonian, Vincentian/Grenadinian, West Indian, Caribbean, n.i.e.**, Aboriginal from Central/South America, Argentines, Belizean, Bolivian, Brazilian, Chilean, Colombian, Costa Rican, Ecuadorian, Guatemalan, Hispanic, Honduran, Maya, Mexican, Nicaragua, Panamanian, Paraguayan, Peruvian, Salvadoran, Uruguayan, Venezuelan, Latin, Central or South American, n.i.e.**, Austrian, Belgian, Dutch (Netherlands), Flemish, Frisian, German, Luxembourger, Swiss, Finnish, Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian, Swedish, Scandinavian, n.i.e.**, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Byelorussian, Czech, Czechoslovak, Slovak, Hungarian (Magyar), Polish, Romanian, Russian, Ukrainian, Albanian, Bosnian, Bulgaria, Croatian, Cypriot, Greek, Italian, Kosovar, Macedonian, Maltese, Montenegrin, Portuguese, Serbian, Sicilian, Slovenian, Spanish, Yugoslavs, Basque, Gypsy (Roma), Jewish, misc. Slav (European), European, n.i.e.**, Afrikaner, Akan, Amhara, Angolan, Ashanti, Bantu, Black, Burundian, Congolese (Zairian) people, Congolese, n.o.s.***, Dinka, East African people, Eritrean, Ethiopian, Gabonese, Gambian, Ghanaian, Guinean, n.o.s.***, Ibo, Ivoirian, Kenyan, Malagasay, Mauritian, Nigerian, Oromo, Rwandan, Senegalese, Seychellois, Sierra Leonean, Somali, South African, Sudanese, Tanzanian, Tigrian, Togolese, Ugandan, Yoruba, Zambian, Zimbabwean, Zulu, African, n.i.e.**, Egyptian, Iraqi, Jordanian, Kuwaiti, Lebanese, Libyan, Algerian, Berber, Moroccan, Tunisian, Maghrebi origins, n.i.e.**, Palestinian, Saudi Arabian, Syrian, Yemeni, Arab, n.i.e.**, Afghan, Armenian, Assyrian, Azeribaijani, Georgian, Iranian, Israeli, Kurd, Pashtun, Tatar, Turk, West Asian, n.i.e.**, Bangladeshi, Bengali, East Indian, Goan, Gujurati, Kashmiri, Nepali, Pakistani, Punjabi, Sinhalese, Sri Lankan, Tamil, South Asian, n.i.e.**, Burmese, Cambodian, Chinese, Filipino, Hmong, Indonesian, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Laotian, Malaysian, Mongolian, Singaporean, Taiwanese, Thai, Tibetan, Vietnamese, East or Southeast Asian, n.i.e.**, Asian, n.o.s.***, Australian, New Zealander, Fijian, Hawaiian, Māori, Polynesia, Samoan, Pacific Islander, n.i.e.**, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.234.129 (talk) 07:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's all very interesting but I have no idea why you're mentioning this to me. freshacconci talktalk 13:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please also explain

this revert. Thanks, Resolute 16:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I can't. I have no idea why that happened. It was not intentional. I must have hit revert without noticing. Sorry about that. freshacconci talktalk 23:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
S'alright then. The timing just seemed odd. Cheers! Resolute 14:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay no Problem ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albanianp (talk • contribs) 16:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Intermedia

Hi Freshacconci

I added notable intermedia artists to the intermedia page and you reverted it. But, I thought it needed to be there, mainly because intermedia is such a broad subject (encompassing such divergent artforms - from music, to film, visual art...etc).

I don't have to add it, but with the growing intermedia departments around the world and the confusion around electromedia, non-standard music and cyberarts, there probably needs to be a breakdown on who is considered intermedia so students of Intermedia don't get confused. Also, the genre ranges from the Dada all the way to modern artists today - with some opting to remain true to intermedia and using few cyberartistic techniques. I think the page is really incomplete without the notable artists listed (especially as there are so many on Wikipedia)

Consider adding it or let me continue to update the list (as it's found on many university curricula). Up to you. 17:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Mnocry (talk)

Mail art

Hello Freshacconci

As co-writer of the original Mail Art Wiki page two years ago and mailartist of 30 years' experience, I can confirm that the addition of Luther Blissett by Evarney is a legitimate additional example of a multiple name, Wiki has a 'Luther Blissett (nom de plume)' page. However, a wholly incongruous addition to the page (added by Nagle in October) refers to the marketing of postcards (Line 50) and has so far proved impossible to undo. Mail art isn't about marketing, one of the movement's oldest tenets is 'Mail Art and money don't mix'. The two examples cited, Hairmail and Astroturf, are unheard of and they've been inserted into a section about materials and activities generally, not about specific examples of artworks. Also, the associated Reference (9) links to an article which is not available without a paid Washington Post subscription. Keithbates51 (talk) 09:09, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

COI banner issue

Dear Freshacconci. Thanks to Hyacinth, it has been suggested that given my work history, that I declare a declaration of interest concerning the Joseph Nechvatal page. Perhaps that is an answer. I was not aware of that option before. Anyway, all the information on the Joseph Nechvatal page is objective and verified. Most recent verification can be found on page 199 of the book 100 Ideas that Changed Art by Michael Bird, published by LAURENCE KING PUBLISHING LIMITED, London 2012 - where his painting Orgiastic abattOir : flawless ignudiO (2003) - published with his permission on wikipedia - is presented and discussed around his ideas of the "viractual" (p. 198). The issue of notes does not apply to this page. I would appreciate it if you would remove the COI banner. If it is best, I will not contribute to this page any more. Is that a good solution? Thanks for your help. Valueyou (talk) 11:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Hi, this is Ajayupai95. Just curious, but could you please specify in what way my additions were a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion? But again, I am sorry if it so. Thanks...:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajayupai95 (talk • contribs) 12:35, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Why did you reverted my decline of a request for page protection at WP:RPP? -- KTC (talk) 02:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I'm using an iPad and I think I must have clicked the rollback on my watchlist without realizing it. Sorry about that. I'll try to be more careful. freshacconci talktalk 02:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When "Beyond my ken" does not allow my doctor dissertation to appear in the articles about Amos Vogel and Cinema 16, this is what Wikipedia users loose access to:

• Dobi, Stephen J., Cinema 16: America's Largest Film Society. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. New York University, 1984.

Contents: Introduction; The Formative Years; Something for Everyone; The Art of the Film; Conclusion. Appendices: Arthur Knight on the Experimental Film; Film Courses at New York University; Film Courses at The New School; The Children's Cinema; Films Shown at George Eastman House; The Robert J. Flaherty Awards; The Creative Film Foundation Awards; Organizational & Institutional Renters; Index of Filmmakers (Alphabetical and also Premieres); Index of Films (Alphabetical List, Features Premiered by Cinema 16, Shorts Premiered by Cinema 16, Films "re-introduced" by Cinema 16; Speakers at Cinema 16 events.

Abstract: This study examines the sixteen year history (1947-1963) of this unique film society. It looks at its beginnings, goals, motives, biases and method of operation. It examines how the organization saw its role in film art and commerce; how it defined the job it set out to do, and how it accomplished that job.

It examines in detail the many projects Cinema 16 created for its membership of over 7,000 cineastes. These included Regular Programs, Special Events, Film Appreciation Courses, The Children's Cinema, excursions to George Eastman House, Robert J. Flaherty Awards, Creative Film Awards, program notes, and its major contribution to American Avant-garde film exhibition and distribution. Cinema 16 introduced to America the works of Lindsay Anderson, Kenneth Anger, Michelangelo Antonioni, Stan Brakhage, Robert Breer, Robert Bresson, John Cassavetes, Shirley Clarke, Bruce Conner, Carmen D'Avino, Vittorio de Sica, Ed Emshwiller, Pierre Etaix, John Hubley, Tadashi Imai, Humphrey Jennings, Gavin Lambert, Jan Lenica, Norman McLaren, Andrzej Munk, Leopoldo Torre-Nilsson, Yasujiro Ozu, Roman Polanski, Karel Reisz, Tony Richardson, Jacques Rivette, Lionel Rogosin, Arne Sucksdorff, Shiro Toyoda, Stan Vanderbeek, Agnes Varda, Herbert Vesely, among others.

In sixteen years it presented over thirteen-hundred films ranging in length from sixty seconds to features, most in premiere showings. It arranged for subtitled versions, music tracks, paying for "dupe-negatives," importation costs, customs fees, and always paying rental fees.

Cinema 16 conducted symposia and lectures on films and related topics. Personal appearances were made by Rudolf Arnheim, Joseph Burstyn, Joseph Campbell, James Card, Salvador Dali, Maya Deren, Ralph Ellison, Frances Flaherty, Richard Griffith, Nat Hentoff, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kramer, Fritz Lang, Lotte Lenya, Norman McLaren, Sidney Meyers, Arthur Miller, Jean Renoir, Hans Richter, Dylan Thomas, Parker Tyler, Willard Van Dyke, King Vidor, Tennessee Williams, Archer Winsten, Robert Wise, Fred Zinneman, and others.

Its greatest contribution was to the avant-garde--all of the leading and subsequently famous names in the film avant garde of the period were premiered at Cinema 16. It helped create reputations.Filmdoctor1 (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Freshacconci&oldid=531340258"