Talk:The Accolade (Leighton)

Proposal for Deletion
I removed the article "Proposal for Deletion" tag. It noted that it was being proposed due to concerns over notability. The tag advised editors who objected to the deletion to improve the article and that they may remove the tag if they objected to it for any reason. It said that we were encouraged, but not required, to state our reasons on the Talk page, so I am doing so. I'll admit that the article was in very poor condition when the tag was added, however a very brief, cursory search revealed that the painting is reproduced and/or discussed on a number of art-related sites including Sotheby's, The Art Renewal Center, and All Art Classics. Although the latter does not have its own Wikipedia page, all three are cited as sources on numerous art-related Wikipedia articles and The Art Renewal Center and All Art Classics both single out the painting as being one of the artist's best known works. At any rate, I believe that indicates that the subject meets notability requirements and there are many more references that somebody more familiar with the subject matter could use to further improve the article. Aurum ore (talk) 23:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Dimensions seem to be wrong
The dimensions shown in the box are "144 cm × 100 cm (57 in × 39 in)". I think there is an error, becaus the painting is roughly twice as high as it is wide, so there should be an aspect ratio of approx. 2:1. 144:100 or 57:39 is far away from that. The displayed picture is correct, it isn't trimmed or stretched, so the dimensions in the article seem to be wrong. I do not find the correct dimensions via google. Maybe somebody has a better resource? Farbeyon (talk) 09:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree.

Using the picture shown on the article page, the ratio of width to height is 1:1.7105.

But using the figures provided in inches, the ratio works out to 1:1.4615.

That's quite a difference.

So, can anyone verify the actual size of the painting?

Just curious. 2600:8800:785:2A00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 03:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Background
The article describes a knighting-stool while the candidate in the picture knees on a cushion. It's just a detail but a little bit disturbing. Just omitting the knighting-stool or giving it a separate sentence would make the description better. Ciao --Pentaclebreaker (talk) 10:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out, I've changed it. Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Insignia of their knightly order
Is it of interest, that the young man - most likely the page of the knight-to-be - standing in the first row in the group of six viewers, holds the shield with the coat of arms (same on the backside of his tunic, eagle with a crescent moon) and golden spurs in his hands? By the way, any resemblance of the coat of arms, or pure fiction? Ciao --Pentaclebreaker (talk) 12:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)