Talk:Arambilet

Computer Art Pioneer
The given source is unreliable (anonymous), and the date given for the work is rather late. For a pioneer in this area, one would expect a date in the 1960s. TEDickey (talk) 10:22, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Article improved.

Please observe difference of opinion. Frieder Nake, computer arts pioneer compilator, sponsored by University of Bremen. Source excerpt: Early Phase of Digital Art: 1950-1979.

http://dada.compart-bremen.de/main/about

compArt daDA: the database Digital Art

The compArt database Digital Art (daDA) is a growing repository on digital art. It currently focusses on five top categories: people (in their roles as artists, authors, gallerists, etc.), works, events, publications, and institutions. We use the slightly problematic term “digital art” in a broad sense. More or less like: in order to be included, an entity of the data base must have its roots in operations by digital computers; or reflect on such entities, or be otherwise related to them.

We are currently restricting attention to the early phase of digital art. As those we consider the years from about 1950 to 1979, the year of the first Festival Ars Electronica in Linz, Austria. During those years, digital art was mainly algorithmic art. At some later time, we intend to include other forms of digital art. We already now occasionally accept works, artists, etc. that bear enough of a stylistic kinship with early digital art.

“compArt | center of excellence digital art” is a project at the University of Bremen, Germany. It is dedicated to research and development in art, computing, design, and teaching. It has received support from the Rudolf Augstein Stiftung, the University of Bremen, the Karin und Uwe Hollweg Stiftung Bremen, and the Volkswagen Stiftung.

If this is not satisfactory, the term "Pioneer" may be removed and susbstituted by "artist". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fundacionbarlovento (talk • contribs) 13:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Then "artist" would work. "Pioneer" appears to be a construct (by choosing a suitable definition), rather than well-sourced. TEDickey (talk) 23:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarifications. External links minimised. Please advice if any other improvement on the entry could be optimised. Very best, FB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fundacionbarlovento (talk • contribs) 18:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * A source (such as a published review) is needed for the sentence beginning "In Latin America, Arambilet is considered". The subsequent comment is somewhat verbose and does not (as done in ) make the point that the "first" is for the combination of the two forms -- and first within a particular geographic region.  But  is very terse, and saying more in this topic than the original source does not help the reader.  Perhaps there is a more substantial source which makes the point. TEDickey (talk) 23:43, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Entry minimised, external links removed. F.B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fundacionbarlovento (talk • contribs) 14:08, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * That looks improved TEDickey (talk) 01:07, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Arambilet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714213416/http://www.gidoi.com/socios/ to http://www.gidoi.com/socios/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)