Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts:

Student project[edit]

Please all keep an eye on the articles at Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Kansas City Art Institute/Western Art I (Fall 2015) over the next months. Per the timetable it seems they aren't due to start posting to mainspace until November. Johnbod (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

This bunch has now started editing - all their articles are listed on the project page. The edits are of about the usual student quality, so all need a check. Johnbod (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

French Sculpture Census[edit]

See Archive 16/ item 14: French Sculpture Census (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Archive_16#French_Sculpture_Census, June 5-9, 2015), where contributors were Templeshipley, Johnbod and Jane.

The talk was about creating External links from Wikipedia artists pages to French Sculpture Census website. Johnbod and Jane agreed upon the fact these links would be useful.

I started creating them in Wikipedia English and another user will create them in Wikipédia French. After the third link created, I had a message from Wikipedia: "You are creating many links at a high rythm. This could be deemed as spamming and you might be blocked."

Can I go on creating links (I have app. 300 links to create and probably a bit more in Wikipédia French) without risking seeing them removed?

Thank you for your advice.

Laure de Margerie, Director, French Sculpture Census. LauredeMargerie (talk) 17:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I hope - where was this message? Your talkpage is blank. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Salut Laure. The message will have been an automatic one, as your account is not yet autoconfirmed to certain computer programs you look like a spammer. I would suggest that you put links to that archive on your userpage and talkpage so people know that what you are doing has been discussed. When your account has ten edits and is four days old you will find you can do more per day without triggering a warning or having to complete a capcha. As it is I would suggest adding a few each day, once you have met the ten edit in 4 day criteria you can speed up a bit. Also if you use an edit summary of "adding link per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Archive_16#French_Sculpture_Census " instead of "added an external link" then the people who patrol new edits will be much more likely to leave you alone. ϢereSpielChequers 17:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for the useful tips. Yes, the message was an automatic one.

I will do as you say in order to reach the ten edits in four days threshold.

Thanks again, Laure LauredeMargerie (talk) 20:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Laure, It looks like there is something wrong with the way you are adding the links. In the case of the first one you made on Nicolas-Sébastien Adam, it didn't link to the correct page about the artist. I fixed the link so you can see what I am talking about here. If you just place links to the homepage of the French Sculpture Census then I can see why you will be accused of spam. The detailed information about the artists is welcome though, so I hope you able to adjust the links on your own. Best, Jane (talk) 20:32, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Jane. I will change the existing links to direct to the artist page on frenchsculpture.org. For the French Wikipedia, can the person who will create the links refer in the edit summary to the English Wikipedia Visual Arts talk? She would then include the same edit summary as on the English Wikipedia pages but in French: "lien ajouté voir Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Archive_16#French_Sculpture_Census " LauredeMargerie (talk) 13:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Here you would add an "interWiki link"; to link to a page on English Wikipedia you insert the code :en: at the front, thus: en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Archive_16#French_Sculpture_Census: Noyster (talk), 14:34, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

'New' article Uppspretta[edit]

'New', well, fairly new. The artwork of Uppspretta, situated in Iceland, has a more complete article now. It was very small before. Please feel free to correct language if you find it necessary, English is not my maternal language. Next to that I don't know what to tag on the talk page. Art is not mentioned there for instance. Can someone do that please? Thank you in advance! Ymnes (talk) 12:54, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Guidance[edit]

I am new here and I am looking to participate in the visual arts project. I have a few questions. First off, at what institutes permanent collections make someone notable? I know MoMA is one. Are there any other museums? Is there a list somewhere?

Second, what kind of fellowships make people notable? I known that Guggenheim recipients are notable. What about Pollock Krasner Grants? Again, is there a list for this?Susana Hodge (talk) 06:16, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

There's no list that I know of, but Wikipedia has notability criteria for artists at WP:ARTIST. An artist who robustly satisfies one or more of these standards is notable; an artist who barely/arguably meets only one of them is likely to be challenged, and editors may differ in what they consider "major" and "significant". It always helps if the artist has been written about a great deal. Ewulp (talk) 08:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
A single print at MoMA might not be enough, especially if donated. University museums are generally not enough by themselves. I've never heard of Pollock Krasner Grants myself (in the UK), so that is probably not enough. The process is somewhat variable and inconsistent; you should follow Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts a bit, and start contributing. Most people there will know little about art, but a fair amount about WP deletion rules. Media coverage is important, exhibitions, dealer gallery, and prices can all be relevant. Johnbod (talk) 15:07, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I see from Pollock-Krasner Foundation that artist recipients must have "demonstrable financial need", which in the current market arguably suggests they might not be notable. But I don't know. Johnbod (talk) 15:17, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
In general, I would recommend against using grants as a determinant of notability. OTOH, the fact that an artist is eligible for funding is completely irrelevant to their notability. A quick survey shows there are articles about between 15-20% of recipients of the Pollock-Krasner Foundation grant. There may be some artists in that lists whose notability is questionable, but there are others who undoubtedly are notable. Mduvekot (talk) 16:40, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Rather fewer than that, I thought - 10-15%. I looked at a few, who mostly seemed notable, and also rather older than one might expect - one turns 100 this year. Johnbod (talk) 19:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

"Life of Christ"[edit]

The usage and topic of Life of Christ is under discussion, see talk:Life of Christ -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 07:12, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Is this person notable?[edit]

Is this artist notable under the applicable guidelines: Wayne Cooper (artist)? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

He would fail WP:artist.
  • He is not regarded as an important figure nor is he widely cited by peers or successors.
  • He is not known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
  • He has not created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. His work has not been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
  • His work (or works) either (a) has not become a significant monument, (b) has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has not won significant critical attention, and (d) is not represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.Mduvekot (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

New category question: Should there be a category for the location of a painting or painting collection?[edit]

I began a series of categories describing where a painting or collection of paintings is located. Wikipedia has categories for what style or nationality the painter derives from but not one for where the painting is physically located. there are categories localizing collections and museums to geographic locales, but there are paintings that exist outside of museums in publicly available sites (churches and administrative buildings).

My endeavor in Italy is somewhat confused at present in that there is a category of Italian paintings in addition to Paintings in Italy. The topics are different, the former refers to the nationality of the creator, but to geographically localized both creates two large category trees. I now vote that I should not have tried to geographically localize "Italian paintings" but stick only to geographic locale of any painting, regardless of the nationality of the painter. At some point I would delete my beginning attempts to geographically localize Italian paintings, again and focus only on where is a painting localized, regardless of style, or nationality of artist. Rococo1700 (talk) 13:07, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Imo yes, we already have this: Category:Collection of the Museum of Modern Art...Modernist (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

What about paintings outside of Museums but affixed to a location?Rococo1700 (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I think there is a place for these for selective locations with many different homes of notable paintings, ie, London, Venice, or New York. But not eg Indianapolis, where I presume they are all in one place. Mostly the categories should be added to the existing "Collections of..." categories, even if they are not 100% paintings. Must these be just paintings? It is a classic weakness of WP art coverage that we categorize by paintings rather than artworks. Johnbod (talk) 18:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I was exploring making "paintings in a place" a subcategory of "Arts in the same place". would that address one of your points. Rococo1700 (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

In larger places, at the cost of yet another level of categories. I wonder how many people ever make it through the endless levels of Italian location categories for example. Johnbod (talk) 22:46, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Second question: Should paintings should be considered within category of monuments and memorials?[edit]

Sculptures are part of category. As such, they then fall within spectrum of buildings and structures at a locale. Should canvases and/or frescoes/murals be considered the same? Rococo1700 (talk) 19:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

No. A memorial or monument is a built, ceremonial structure. Paintings are not built structures. Frescoes are a bit more complicated. Funerary Monument to Sir John Hawkwood is correctly categorized under Monuments and memorials in Florence for example. Mduvekot (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

In general, I agree, maybe the paintings, but also monuments and memorials, should be categorized under "arts in a certain location. Only the latter shares categorization under buildings and structures. Rococo1700 (talk) 16:08, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm not actually clear what the question is. Is it "should paintings within monuments and memorials be categorized within "Cat:Paintings in Foo"?" If so, yes. If it is "should monuments and memorials with paintings, and only articles on the paintings, be categorized within "Cat:monuments and memorials in Foo"?", the answer may be yes, sometimes. But I don't think this will often be appropriate. Do you have an example? Johnbod (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

The question is whether Titian's assumption at the Frari is a monument and memorial. Rococo1700 (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok. No, it isn't, imo. Johnbod (talk) 14:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Asian art and History_of_Eastern_art merge/rename proposal[edit]

See Talk:History_of_Eastern_art#Requested_move_19_January_2016, where it is also suggested Asian art is merged, both ending as a new History of Asian art. Please make any comments there. Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 18:11, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest help required for The Honest Body Project[edit]

The Honest Body Project (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello, visual arts Wikipedians. I spotted this article while patrolling new pages. It seems to pass the WP:CCS test, and looks like it may have WP:NOTABILITY, with a good number of sources already cited (quality of sources not verified by me). What is needed is for someone who is suitably experienced at managing a WP:COI and has the correct background to properly evaluate the article and sources. The creator, NatalieRMcCain (talk · contribs) seems friendly and keen to work with us to address the COI. So, I'm appealing to you to help Natilie out with this. If you are interested, please see Talk:The Honest Body Project#Conflict of Interest. Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 05:36, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Who is the artist of this painting[edit]

Who is the artist of this painting File:Winter Oil Painting.jpg --محمد الفلسطيني (talk) 10:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)