Novem Linguae (talk | contribs) →Long lists of exhibitions and collections: Replying to Netherzone (using reply-link) |
Netherzone (talk | contribs) →Long lists of exhibitions and collections: Replying to Novem Linguae (using reply-link) |
||
Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
:::::{{u|Novem Linguae}}, Both artists are notable per [[WP:NARTIST]]. I've spent several hours starting to rebuild these two articles into encyclopedic form after they were stripped down, and I do not wish to spend more time on them. You might want to correct those citations in Mary Fitzgerald if they bother you. Buetti is 100% notable - per the international exhibition record and multiple collections in notable museums. Fitzgerald is 100% notable, she represented Ireland in the Sao Paulo Bienial, and has an international career plus museum collections. To my way of thinking the articles needed cleaning up or maintenance tagging not TNTing. [[User:Netherzone|Netherzone]] ([[User talk:Netherzone|talk]]) 23:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC) |
:::::{{u|Novem Linguae}}, Both artists are notable per [[WP:NARTIST]]. I've spent several hours starting to rebuild these two articles into encyclopedic form after they were stripped down, and I do not wish to spend more time on them. You might want to correct those citations in Mary Fitzgerald if they bother you. Buetti is 100% notable - per the international exhibition record and multiple collections in notable museums. Fitzgerald is 100% notable, she represented Ireland in the Sao Paulo Bienial, and has an international career plus museum collections. To my way of thinking the articles needed cleaning up or maintenance tagging not TNTing. [[User:Netherzone|Netherzone]] ([[User talk:Netherzone|talk]]) 23:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
::::::{{u|Netherzone}}, good point on [[WP:NARTIST]], Buetti might qualify under #4b {{tq|been a substantial part of a significant exhibition}}. I was never worried about Fitzgerald's notability. Anyway, in the future feel free to revert a WP:TNT you disagree with, and we can follow BRD and talk it out. I'd rather have the sting of a revert, than have you annoyed for an hour re-writing the article. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:limegreen">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 00:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC) |
::::::{{u|Netherzone}}, good point on [[WP:NARTIST]], Buetti might qualify under #4b {{tq|been a substantial part of a significant exhibition}}. I was never worried about Fitzgerald's notability. Anyway, in the future feel free to revert a WP:TNT you disagree with, and we can follow BRD and talk it out. I'd rather have the sting of a revert, than have you annoyed for an hour re-writing the article. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:limegreen">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 00:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
:::::::{{u|Novem Linguae}}, I'm perplexed, Buetti's work is in many museum collections, there are now ten sourced notable museum collections in the article. NARTIST criteria 4d states "several" notable collections which I understand to mean two or more (this is the standard that has been used at AfD.) Artists do not have to meet all four criteria of NARTIST, just one. [[User:Netherzone|Netherzone]] ([[User talk:Netherzone|talk]]) 00:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:10, 29 March 2021
Visual arts Project‑class | |||||||
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Template:ACArt created
I have created Template:ACArt, a visual arts specific version of the general Template:Authority Control. I have implemented it at Jan van Eyck as a demonstration: it reduces the clutter of 36 or so AC links to a much more reasonable 15, keeping the arts-specific ones (like RKD or Balat) and the most useful general ones for enwiki (Worldcat, LoC, ...), but removing the less interesting ones (non-English ones simply repeating the biographic basics, or things like Musicbrainz). The selection of what to include and what to exclude may need refinement, this is done in Module:ACArt (a spin-off of Module:Authority control).
All you need to do is replace, at the bottom of an article, {{Authority control}} with {{ACArt}}, et voilà! Fram (talk) 10:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- This is helpful, but at the moment misses the most important items like the British Museum, Joconde, Metropolitan and other big US collections, V&A etc. Auckland NZ is no substitute. Johnbod (talk) 15:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Joconde is included, if it is on Wikidata. The others are not available in the main authority control template, I don't know if they are on Wikidata. If they are available on Wikidata, they can be added to authority control and will then appear in ACArt as well. Fram (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, you are going to look into this? Johnbod (talk) 16:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Not immediately. I'll first see whether this new template is considered an improvement by enough people, and whether the choice of links to display from the currently available ones is good (some missing, some not wanted, ...). A separate discussion can be had to add more of the (many) art IDs Wikidata has to the main authority control template (there are dozens of them). At worst, if it would become too much for the general authority template but the art people want them anyway, we can turn this again into a truly separate template instead of a selective wrapper; but I would prefer to avoid this. Wanted additions can be proposed at Wikipedia talk:Authority control: at the moment all additions to that template will also show up in the ACArt one.
- TLDR: for extra identifiers, ask at Wikipedia talk:Authority control. For removal of identifiers from the ACArt template, ask at Template talk:ACArt. Fram (talk) 16:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, you are going to look into this? Johnbod (talk) 16:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Joconde is included, if it is on Wikidata. The others are not available in the main authority control template, I don't know if they are on Wikidata. If they are available on Wikidata, they can be added to authority control and will then appear in ACArt as well. Fram (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Jealousy in art
Stumbled upon Jealousy in art, which is quite rough if any project members care to help improve. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Sourcing and OR tags since 2007 - impressive! Fortunately it's mostly about literature. As student essays go, I've seen worse. Johnbod (talk) 16:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Disappointed. I thought it would be about artists' jealousy of each other. freshacconci (✉) 16:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Campbell's Soup Cans Featured article review
I have nominated Campbell's Soup Cans for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 February 15 § Orphaned files uploaded by Krise. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)Template:Z48
Image assistance welcome at Rainy Taxi
I've added an image. Any input would be welcome. Bus stop (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Category and Venus d.M. discussion
Couple things. Have added Category:Rainbows in art which needs a'fillin (as if rainbows weren't art enough), and there is a discussion about italicizing the name of Venus de Milo at the talk page. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:21, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Proposed Move of Yale student abortion art controversy to Untitled (Senior Thesis) (performance)
This is a courtesy notification that I have proposed renaming an article of interest to this WikiProject from Yale student abortion art controversy → Untitled (Senior Thesis) (performance). The move discussion is on the talk page. Theredproject (talk) 10:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Colab members
There is a discussion at Talk:Colab#Regarding the length of member roster about how to implement the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colab Members. Vexations (talk) 23:16, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Trump and His Magic Wand
Trump and His Magic Wand is a mess. Do any project members care to help clean up? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- I've done the worst. Is there WP:COI possibly? Johnbod (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- Johnbod, Thank you. Much better. I'm less concerned about COI than the content itself. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Long lists of exhibitions and collections
Are long lists of exhibitions and collections appropriate for artist articles? Without secondary sources, these strike me as WP:UNDUE and too much like a resume, but figured I'd check here before I go mass deleting them. Examples: Daniele Buetti, Mary Fitzgerald (artist). Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Novem Linguae, I am very much in favor of removing any entry that cannot be reliably sourced. That means a something better than a press release or simply a link to the gallery, as we have at Mary Fitzgerald . These lists are often copied verbatim from artists' CVs and become outdated quickly. If a reader is interested in an up-to-date list, they can usually find them at the artist's own website. ( I'll note that in the cases of these two examples, that is not all that easy: maryfitzgerald.com is a no longer live, but there is an archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20191218135142/http://www.maryfitzgerald.com/cv.html and Buetti doesn't appear to have a website; his CV is at his Belgian gallery https://www.aeroplastics.net/usr/library/documents/main/31/buettidaniele_cv_aeroplastics_2019.pdf Vexations (talk) 12:25, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Well, these aren't examples at all, unless you go to the history, as you've already stripped them back to stubs on the basis of a single comment. Collections and exhibitions are typically key for the notability of contemporary artists, so I think you should be more cautious in calling them WP:UNDUE. Many are of course too long, but typically the more significant ones are key pieces of information. User:Vexations, do you mean "removing any entry that cannot be reliably sourced" or "removing any entry that is not reliably sourced"? There's a big difference. The correct treatment for the latter is to tag it, and maybe talk to the editor who added it. I'd hold off on any "mass deletion". Johnbod (talk) 16:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Johnbod, I meant removing any entry that cannot be reliably sourced. If for example, a museum collection is listed, but not sourced, I search the museum collection prior to marking it is as failed verification and subsequently removing it if I really cannot confirm that a work is in the collection that the article claims. In the case of Buetti, for example, it is easy to confirm that the Migros Museum of Contemporary Art has works by Buetti in their collection https://migrosmuseum.ch/kuenstler/daniele-buetti That belongs in the article. Vexations (talk) 19:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Novem Linguae I have restored the collections that could be verified for these two artists and added refs. I don't think articles on artists who are clearly notable (as the case with Buetti and Fitzgerald) should be chopped so radically. IMO, it's much better to remove the fluff, selectively trim down to essentials and add RS refs. Netherzone (talk) 18:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Netherzone, works for me. I think we arrived at a good equilibrium. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Mary Fitzgerald (artist)'s collection citations may need some attention. Some just linked to the host's homepage. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hey Netherzone. I notice from your edit summaries that you're a little annoyed that I stubbed Daniele Buetti. I mean, you can just revert my stubbing if you feel that strongly about it. This version is the pre-stub version. I think that version is terrible (COI, resume, tone, OR), but who knows, maybe I was wrong to WP:TNT it. Also, you say that this artist is notable like it's a sure thing... when I was doing my WP:BEFORE searches for AFD, it took me half an hour to find one GNG passing source, and even then I wasn't able to confirm because the book is rare. I am not 100% convinced he is notable (need around three GNG passing sources), but I chose to err on the side of caution, as other sources may exist. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Novem Linguae, Both artists are notable per WP:NARTIST. I've spent several hours starting to rebuild these two articles into encyclopedic form after they were stripped down, and I do not wish to spend more time on them. You might want to correct those citations in Mary Fitzgerald if they bother you. Buetti is 100% notable - per the international exhibition record and multiple collections in notable museums. Fitzgerald is 100% notable, she represented Ireland in the Sao Paulo Bienial, and has an international career plus museum collections. To my way of thinking the articles needed cleaning up or maintenance tagging not TNTing. Netherzone (talk) 23:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Netherzone, good point on WP:NARTIST, Buetti might qualify under #4b
been a substantial part of a significant exhibition
. I was never worried about Fitzgerald's notability. Anyway, in the future feel free to revert a WP:TNT you disagree with, and we can follow BRD and talk it out. I'd rather have the sting of a revert, than have you annoyed for an hour re-writing the article. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)- Novem Linguae, I'm perplexed, Buetti's work is in many museum collections, there are now ten sourced notable museum collections in the article. NARTIST criteria 4d states "several" notable collections which I understand to mean two or more (this is the standard that has been used at AfD.) Artists do not have to meet all four criteria of NARTIST, just one. Netherzone (talk) 00:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
- Netherzone, good point on WP:NARTIST, Buetti might qualify under #4b
- Novem Linguae, Both artists are notable per WP:NARTIST. I've spent several hours starting to rebuild these two articles into encyclopedic form after they were stripped down, and I do not wish to spend more time on them. You might want to correct those citations in Mary Fitzgerald if they bother you. Buetti is 100% notable - per the international exhibition record and multiple collections in notable museums. Fitzgerald is 100% notable, she represented Ireland in the Sao Paulo Bienial, and has an international career plus museum collections. To my way of thinking the articles needed cleaning up or maintenance tagging not TNTing. Netherzone (talk) 23:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hey Netherzone. I notice from your edit summaries that you're a little annoyed that I stubbed Daniele Buetti. I mean, you can just revert my stubbing if you feel that strongly about it. This version is the pre-stub version. I think that version is terrible (COI, resume, tone, OR), but who knows, maybe I was wrong to WP:TNT it. Also, you say that this artist is notable like it's a sure thing... when I was doing my WP:BEFORE searches for AFD, it took me half an hour to find one GNG passing source, and even then I wasn't able to confirm because the book is rare. I am not 100% convinced he is notable (need around three GNG passing sources), but I chose to err on the side of caution, as other sources may exist. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Mary Fitzgerald (artist)'s collection citations may need some attention. Some just linked to the host's homepage. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Netherzone, works for me. I think we arrived at a good equilibrium. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)