Talk:Capp Street Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject California / San Francisco Bay Area (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Visual arts (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 

Capp Street Project vs. 500 Capp Street Foundation[edit]

I believe that Capp Street Project and the 500 Capp Street Foundation are separate entities.

Capp Street Project is a residency program that was originally housed in the David Ireland designed house at 65 Capp Street and is still run at the California College of the Arts Wattis Institute for Contemporary Arts.

"500 Capp Street Foundation" restored David Ireland's former home and has objects and ephemera of Ireland's life on view to the public talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Circa73 - OK it is very unclear how two non-profits are operating in the same space. I was looking online at various articles and their websites and I thought they were merged? As far as I can tell Capp Street Project is no longer in existence, their website is defunct. And 500 Capp Street Foundation said in articles they will be hosting artist residencies. Can you find anything that clarifies the confusion? Thanks, Jooojay (talk) 01:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
This article mentioned 500 Capp Street Foundation purchasing the home in 2009 but it does not say from whom. Jooojay (talk) 01:09, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Jooojay - So there are actually two separate properties on Capp Street affiliated with David Ireland: 65 Capp Street, which Ireland created ( see this article about that space and this article for a history of the Capp Street Project residency program that was housed there) and 500 Capp Street, which was Ireland's home and studio (see this article)
According to the Wattis Institute the residency project (see this page )". . . founded by Ann Hatch in 1983, Capp Street Project became part of the Wattis in 1998." Circa73 (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Circa73, right, but on that same webpage it refers to Capp Street Project at Wattis Inst. as an archive now and the visual arts residency "Capp Street Artists (1984–2013)" with an end date. My question is has Capp Street Project closed OR alternatively was Capp Street Project sold in 2009 to the 500 Capp Street Foundation? Are they at all affiliated, if so how? Maybe this article should be about the house as a venue and include both as separate Capp Street Project and 500 Capp Street Foundation as separate entities? I will removed the confusing text from the wiki article until this is resolved. Jooojay (talk) 00:47, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I just found this link, it appears the two non profits were merged (or it was renamed) at some point. I will try to read more about it and add citations. Jooojay (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Jooojay According to this page the Wattis Institute is still running the Capp Street Project residency, and currently (Dec 8, 2015-Feb 10, 2016)has an exhibit up in which the artist "presents new work as the result of her three-month stay in San Francisco as 2015 Capp Street resident." Circa73 (talk) 21:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
They are related programs, we know that 500 Capp Street is the place that is funding and owns the house. We know that Capp Street Project is the term for the artist residency. We know that Ann Hatch is a director of both. Jooojay (talk) 01:16, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

"At the heart of the David Ireland House is the 500 Capp Street Foundation’s artist residency program, which extends Ireland’s influence by inviting other artists to create work in direct response to the house, its contents, and permanent archive. As a teacher and mentor, Ireland actively curated his 500 Capp Street home and opened it to fellow artists from all disciplines, including visual artists, writers, musicians, and artists working in performance-based platforms, making the house—and all that creatively and socially transpired within it—a hub of the artistic community. Launching in 2017, a planned artist residency program will perpetuate that tradition with an initial focus on opportunities for Bay Area artists, offering a stipend to offset San Francisco housing costs. The foundation intends to grow the program to eventually encompass an international community of artists."

''In 2008, San Francisco art collector and patron Carlie Wilmans, granddaughter of late Bay Area philanthropist Phyllis C. Wattis, purchased the building. Soon after she established the 500 Capp Street Foundation, appointing prominent local art patron Ann Hatch and Yale University Art Gallery Director Jock Reynolds—both longtime friends and associates of Ireland—as fellow founding trustees in oversight of the house as a venue for the preservation and study of the artist’s work. Ireland passed away in 2009 at the age of 78." from http://500cappstreet.org/about-3/mission-history/ Jooojay (talk) 05:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

And my position is: they are not related programs. Following is a quote from a 2009 ArtForum article which clearly differentiates the two separate Capp Street properties, and their differing reasons for importance: 500 Capp as Ireland's home and studio, and 65 Capp as the original venue for Ann Hatch's Capp Street Project residency program
"In 1975, Ireland bought a ramshackle Victorian house at 500 Capp Street in San Francisco. As he slowly transformed its interior, it became known in the art world as the site and source of much of his work of the 1980s and ’90s. In 1979, Ireland bought a second Mission District house at 65 Capp Street and transformed it structurally inside and out, winning him acclaim as a minimalist architect. Art patron Ann Hatch bought the house three years later to serve as home base for a nonprofit artist’s residency she named the Capp Street Project."[1] from Ireland (1930–2009) ArtForum. ArtForum International Magazine. Retrieved 10 February 2016.Circa73 (talk) 19:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Circa73 I found this http://www.sfchronicle.com/style/article/Carlie-Wilmans-long-journey-to-500-Capp-Street-6759062.php - you are right about 65 Capp Street being a residency and it was another former home of David Ireland. However in 8/12/2014 this property sold again. 65 Capp Street is no longer the location for "Capp Street Project" as of 1997, it is the current home of "Lost Church". http://www.thelostchurch.com/page4.html Jooojay (talk) 20:04, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Article name[edit]

Since the 500 Capp Street Foundation is the more current version of Capp Street Project, should we change the name of the wikipedia article? Jooojay (talk) 02:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Jooojay - Capp Street Project still exists as a residency program of the Wattis Institute. The 500 Capp Street Foundation is not a more current version of Capp Street Project. The name of this Wikipedia article should not be changed.

Perhaps the information about the 500 Capp Street Foundation should be incorporated into the David Ireland article? Or...would it warrant it's own, new, page? Circa73 (talk) 22:00, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I am not going to split hairs with you Circa73 or add words in caps, etc to a talk page is not needed. We obviously disagree and if you are unable to be civil and discuss it with me on the talk page so I am done with this issue. The actual house should be the wikipedia article, not simply the residency or the funding. The funding and programs around the house are not deserving of their own wikipedia pages by any means. Also when you delete citations in the future, please be aware that you may effect other parts of the article. Best of luck editing here. Jooojay (talk) 01:12, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Jooojay - I'm sorry if I offended you. Perhaps my caps usage were a bit vehement, and I apologize. I appreciate the research you've done here, it has helped me clarify the information for myself, and find sources to back that up. The Capp Street Project residency programing and the 500 Capp Street House probably each deserve their own page. You seem to feel strongly about the House, perhaps you could create that article?Circa73 (talk) 01:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Circa73 Thank you for your apology. Normally in a situation where we continue to disagree beyond our initial discussion, we would discuss it here on the talk page before we go forward and edit the article. But this link Wikipedia:Dispute resolution also has the formal workflow on dispute beyond talk page. I edit often, I am not feeling vested in this issue to care that much more. I would be interested in hearing what others think on the topic (in terms of the main article title). Jooojay (talk) 02:05, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Jooojay Sounds good, I'm interest in hearing too. Circa73 (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Circa73 These issues are now posted to Wikipedia:Third_opinion#Active_disagreements. Jooojay (talk) 17:09, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Searchtool-80%.png Response to third opinion request ( Disagreement about the name/scope of the article):
I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Capp Street Project and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

After reviewing the discussions above and independently completing a web search, my opinion is that:

Verifiability and no original research are core content policies. The article currently states, "In 2013 the artist residency program named Capp Street Artists ended."[2]. The reference does not state that. The reference only states, "A list of Capp Street Artists (1984–2013) is available here." To edit the Wikipedia article to state that the program ended is original research. Failure of the sponsoring organization to update a weblinked list does not justify our drawing a conclusion and making a statement that is not directly supported by the reference. The 2015 resident of the project, Carissa Rodriguez, is identified on the Wattis Institute web site.[3] She should be added to the list of artists. There may be (probably is) a web page for one or more 2014 residents but the Wattis Institute web site is not well indexed for our research.

Other than members of the boards of directors and stated goals shared by both organizations, I found no connection between the 500 Capp Street Foundation and the Capp Street Project of the Wattis Institute. Connecting them based on colocation, goals or personnel is synthesis. As Wikipedia editors, we may not use synthesis to draw conclusions not specifically stated in independent reliable sources. The 500 Capp Street Foundation web site contains a paragraph about an artist residency program that will be "launching in 2017".[4] The Capp Street Project is not mentioned. To connect the Capp Street Project with the 500 Capp Street Foundation's artist residency program is speculation, synthesis in violation of Wikipedia policy of no original research. I could find no published source that directly connects the projects. I agree that there almost certainly is a connection but until stated in a verifiable source, we Wikipedia editors can't make the connection in a Wikipedia article. All we can properly do is to watch for announcements published by either or both organizations and for reports in independent sources.

To summarize and conclude my opinion on the first bullet, the article name should not be changed. Until or unless a source is found that specifically connects the Capp Street Project and the 500 Capp Street Foundation, content that states or implies a connection should be removed.

The David Ireland house at 500 Capp Street is undeniably notable and deserves a Wikipedia article. It is the subject of a book[5] and there is in-depth coverage in major publications such as the New York Times[6] and the San Francisco Examiner.[7] I found coverage in dozens of lesser sources such as Juxtapoz Magazine[8] for more detail or different perspectives. Although a primary source, details and a unique perspective can be mined from the oral history interview of Ireland himself by Suzanne B. Riess.[9]

In my opinion, an article title 500 Capp Street Foundation is not appropriate as a separate article. It should be a redirect to a major section of an article about the David Ireland house. The foundation's function is to manage the house and associated programs and archives. It would be difficult and maybe impossible to show its notability as an organization. The foundation is mentioned with some depth in most of the recent articles about the David Ireland house but the foundation is only notable in the context of managing the house and the art and archives of Ireland.

If either of you is near the Bay Area, digital photographs of 500 Capp Street and its contents and surrounding area would greatly improve the article about the house. All of the images I could find are constrained by copyright that isn't suitable for Wikipedia. If neither of you are able to take pictures, perhaps you can contact Wikipedians who identify as from the Bay Area to ask that they do so.

My opinion is that a substantial Wikipedia article about the David Ireland house should be created.

Finally, the David Ireland article should, in my opinion, be expanded with a section titled Legacy. That section should summarize and link back to stand-alone articles about the Capp Street Project and the David Ireland house. The article needs a good copy edit and would benefit from more research and expansion.

Jooojay and Circa73, I thank both of you for drawing me to articles and a subject area that I otherwise would never have seen. I learned a lot. I hope that you find my opinion of some value. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 21:12, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Third Opinion references

  1. ^ "David Ireland (1930–2009)". ArtFroum. ArtForum International Magazine. Retrieved 10 February 2016. 
  2. ^ "Capp Street Project". CCA Wattis Institute for Contemporary Arts. Retrieved 2016-02-05. 
  3. ^ "Carissa Rodriguez". The Wattis Institute. Retrieved 11 February 2016. 
  4. ^ "About". 500 Capp Street Foundation. Retrieved 11 February 2016. 
  5. ^ Lewallen, Constance M. (April 2015). 500 Capp Street: David Ireland's House. University of California Press. ISBN 9780520280281. 
  6. ^ Finkel, Jori (December 18, 2015). "Preserving David Ireland’s Home in All Its Marred Glory". New York Times. Retrieved 11 February 2016. 
  7. ^ Katz, Leslie (January 14, 2016). "Artist David Ireland’s legacy lives on at 500 Capp Street". San Francisco Examiner. Retrieved 11 February 2016. 
  8. ^ Vitello, Gwynned (January 17, 2016). "David Ireland: Open House at 500 Capp Street". Juxtapoz Art & Culture Magazine. 
  9. ^ Ireland, David (2001). "Inside 500 Capp Street: An Oral History of David Ireland’s House" (PDF). Regional Oral History Office. The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley,. Retrieved 11 February 2016. 
Thank you DocTree! Jooojay (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your input DocTree!Circa73 (talk) 15:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

List of artists[edit]

Hi again Jooojay . Looks like we're both working on the list of artists, so I wanted to check in with you. For formatting, does "Last name, First name" or "First name Last name" seem better? Not sure if there are set rules for lists...do you know?Circa73 (talk) 23:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Circa73, From my experience on Wikipedia, we don't do surnames first. I have been collaboratively editing lists in which we all needed to change this but I don't know off the top of my head the rule. Have you checked the Wikipedia:Manual of Style for any list rules? That is where I would start. Jooojay (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the resource reference Jooojay. Consistency seems to be the main rule for lists, didn't see anything in particular about name order...but based on your "on Wikipedia, we don't do surnames first" experience, let's make that our rule: "First name Last name" for list entries. I'll edit the ones I entered in the opposite orderCirca73 (talk) 20:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good to me Circa73! I am sure somewhere on here there is a rule, since Wikipedia has no shortage of rules ;) but could take forever to find it. Jooojay (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)