Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Archive 16

Visual vs. plastic arts
It seems English usage of "visual arts" surpassed that of "plastic arts" at about 1950: ; the singular forms crossed 20 years later: ; see all plural/singular forms together:  (the plastic ones are much older; apparently none of the visuals existed prior to 1920, and in 1935 the plural form took off). Fgnievinski (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * But they don't mean the same thing. Painting & printmaking aren't in the plastic arts. That term is certainly not much used in English, hardly ever in newspapers for example. I think you'll find that the rise in the use of "visual arts" was to overcome the ambiguity of "art", and it is now used where "art" would once have been. Johnbod (talk) 11:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, I hadn't checked the ref at plastic arts, to an American dictionary. I must say I was surprised by their 2nd, broader, definition, & can't recall ever seeing it clearly used. I wonder if other dictionaries have that? It seems to reintroduce massive ambiguity. Johnbod (talk) 11:45, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


 * My dictionary gives the same definition for "plastic arts" as Johnbod's, which surprised me. As Johnbod also says correctly, it introduces "massive ambiguity". I think the term "plastic arts" makes no sense when it's applied to painting and printmaking, photography. In my experience, "plastic arts" has always referred to three-dimensional work - work that is plastic, i.e., can be molded or shaped.. - Xenxax (talk) 15:06, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


 * There has been past related discussions in Talk:Plastic arts and Talk:Visual arts/Archives/2013. Fgnievinski (talk) 15:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Drowning Girl
Please see discussion here. I have initiated what I hope will be a discussion and I have titled it primary material/secondary material. Bus stop (talk) 03:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion: WP:MERGE Endurance art into Performance art
I've initiated a discussion here. Bus stop (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Et in Arcadia ego
I've made an initial attempt to clean up the article on Poussin's Et in Arcadia ego; the previous version didn't seem to be able to decide whether it was about the painting or its title, and included a lot of WP:UNDUE conspiracy theories on the latter. I'm not an art expert, so input from members of this wikiproject would be appreciated. Is there a template for what sections should be included in an article on a painting?

I've changed the redirect The Arcadian Shepherds to point to the Poussin version, rather than the Guercino version at Et in Arcadia ego (Guercino). It's my understanding that this title is more commonly used for the Poussin version (just as the Poussin painting is at Et in Arcadia ego while Guercino gets the disambiguated title), but I may be wrong on that.--Trystan (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Southern Cross (wordless novel) Featured Article Candidate
I've nominated the article for the Canadian artist Laurence Hyde's wordless novel, Southern Cross (wordless novel), as a Featured Article Candidate. Please contribute to the review here. Thanks! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 12:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Illustration House
Hi, I wouldn't normally use a gallery as a source, but Illustration House (see About) was founded by Walt Reed. I checked the Reliable sources noticeboard and didn't see anything one way or another - and it seemed better to ask the question here where folks would be more knowledgeable about good sources for visual art articles.

Could this be used as a source for a biography for Pruett Carter? Or, disallowed because it's a gallery or other reason? -- CaroleHenson (talk) 19:40, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


 * User:CaroleHenson, I don't see a real problem using that as a source. Yes, it's a commercial gallery and auctioneer, but Walt Reed was also the foremost scholar on the subject of American Illustration. Disclosure: he was once a family friend. JNW (talk) 03:37, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Wonderful, thanks, - and an interesting connection!-- CaroleHenson (talk) 05:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Endless House
Dear visual arts experts: This architectural design seems to be notable, since it has attracted a lot of written comment, but the page needs some attention from someone who knows more about this subject than I do. I have chopped out a lot of opinion, but since most of it is incomprehensible to me, I may have made things worse. Any help would be appreciated.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I agree, it would be nice to find someone who works on architectural articles to review the article. I made some edits and tagged some places where the sources need to be improved (blog, primary source, tertiary source situations). I have added comments on the AfC page.-- CaroleHenson (talk) 06:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, CaroleHenson. By editing it you have delayed its deletion for six months. Perhaps someone who knows architectural sources will take an interest in it during that time.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, -- CaroleHenson (talk) 01:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ilgvars Zalans and Ilgvars Zalāns
Dear visual art experts: Here is an old AfC submission  about an artist, but the content is mainly sourced to YouTube videos and press releases. There's a small stub in mainspace which is mainly an update, and has one source. If this is a notable artist, I will content-merge these two pages, but I don't want to do this if the result is going to be deleted. References seem to be in Latvian. Any opinions?&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , I am sorry I didn't see this earlier. It looks like the AfC article was deleted, but you're right about there being an issue with youtube and press releases as sources. In March, someone came along and expanded the article based upon what I'm guessing are Latvian sources. If you have other information, though, and can expand the article further, that would be great!-- CaroleHenson (talk) 05:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * , I took a look at the deleted draft, and it seems that the editor who created it is the same person who expanded the mainspace article. This is the best result, because now the draft is not needed and attribution of the content is straightforward. Unfortunately, I don't have more information. Thanks for calling my attention to this.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 11:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Cool!-- CaroleHenson (talk) 01:07, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Peer review Museum de Oude Wolden
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Editør (talk • contribs) 12:19, 25 August 2013‎ (UTC)
 * I assume that this has been done, because the article has made Good Article status. Is that right, ?-- CaroleHenson (talk) 06:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, the article was reviewed and has reached good article status since. Additional comments can of course be posted on Talk:Museum de Oude Wolden. – Editør (talk) 07:54, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Archives of Khazad-Dum
Here is the link to this blog: http://archivesofkhazad-dum.blogspot.com.es/2011/06/about-archives-of-khazad-dum.html#links I don't know if this fits here. I thought that as this was well-intentioned and self-demonstrated it could be used as a reliable source for Trivia (?) information of some photos and paintings used in album covers. I just want to know if this could be accepted.--Hienafant (talk) 14:24, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I think not. See WP:RS for more detail. Johnbod (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) to be moved to Columbia University performance art controversy. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Mattress Performance
There is a discussion at the BLP noticeboard which may be relevant to this wikiproject. --Sammy1339 (talk) 00:52, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Clea Badaro
Hello, visual arts experts. Here's a draft article about an Egyptian artist. Is this a notable artist? In spite of having a number of references, the article seems to just say that she grew up, created some art, met a novelist who based a character in one of his books on her, and that her sister mounted two exhibitions after her death. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It seems enough for notability to me, but better references are needed. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , I see that you've moved it to mainspace. I cleaned up the AfC templates.  One more off my list; thanks. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 13:34, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I never know how to do that. Johnbod (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Johnbod, If you want to conveniently move drafts to mainspace, consider installing the gadget "Yet Another AFC Helper Script" in your preferences. It has an option to accept drafts, while making it easy to give them appropriate names, add WikiProject banners on the talk page and (optionally) add wikidata and categories.  Then it removes all AfC templates and moves the draft to the new name.  The only thing is, if the page is moved prematurely, it could be tagged for deletion, so the gadget has to be used with discretion.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 18:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

French Sculpture Census
I write to connect the French Sculpture Census with Wikipedia, as both projects share similar principles of free access to quality information.

Please find the linked press release that details the project on which I am working. In an effort to widen educational access to dependable art historical information, the French Sculpture Census is partnered with two American institutions (University of Texas at Dallas and the Nasher Sculpture Center, Dallas). It is partnered with four French institutions: Institut national d’histoire de l’art, Paris Musée d’Orsay, Paris Musée Rodin, Paris Ecole du Louvre, Paris

The project can be viewed here: http://frenchsculpture.org/ The press release for the project can be viewed here: https://www.utdallas.edu/arthistory/news/french-sculpture-census-press-release.html

I propose to insert external reference links on +500 Wikipedia pages on French sculpture. The goal is to provide Wikipedia readers the opportunity to dig deeper into a particular artist's artwork and provenance by clicking on the external link located on the Wikipedia page. Before undertaking this task, I seek approval from the wikipedia community. I would like to work with you to be sure that the external links are not taken down. I look forward to any suggestions that you may have.

Best,

Temple Shipley Assistant French Sculpture Census — Preceding unsigned comment added by Templeshipley (talk • contribs) 15:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok I suppose, though Temple doesn't tell us that all you get is "a digital archive of 7,000 French sculptures dating between 1500 and 1960 that are found in American museums, public buildings, historic homes and estates, or displayed in public space." - so French collections aren't included, let alone others. You get an image & very basic catalogue info (one example. Pretty comparable to the British "My paintings" links, but less useful as these are stray pieces in a foreign land.  No biographical info at all, which is a pity.  But most of the these articles are so neglected, & Commons much worse than for painters, that anything is an improvement. Johnbod (talk) 15:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Could be useful for French sculpture lovers worldwide so definitely something for Wikidata. I like the idea, though it seems a shame they go to all those places where probably other great sculptures are and only catalog the French ones. Indeed a bit like "My paintings" (which will soon have a "My sculptures", btw), but a subset for "sculpture art in US locations by artists of French origin". I am with you Johnbod that as far as sculpture goes, we suffer from the "Copyright gap" so anything with a persistent link is more than welcome on any of those sculptor pages, and if the University of Texas (or Institut national d'histoire de l'art) has sculptors not on Wikipedia, then they could be a reliable source along with some other documentation. We need more visual material for sculptors! Jane (talk) 09:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The list of sculptors has been added to Mix-n-Match here. Jane (talk) 11:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this feedback. The mix n' match link is very useful. I have a few more questions as follows:
 * 1) Within the French Sculpture Census database, about 10% of artist entries include links to existing Wikipedia pages (always citing the source as “Wikipedia + date”). See examples: ORLOFF and HILBERT (French version of website only). Do you all wish that a direct link to the Wikipedia page is added?
 * 2) In order to create new wikipedia pages for obscure artists, we might need to use existing encyclopedias/databases. What is the best way to quote existing biographies on other websites in a way that we do not infringe copyright laws? Can we just copy an existing biography and give the source? For some artists, there will not be any entry in any online encyclopedia because they are too minor. For those artists, we might need to build wiki pages (including bios) from scratch, which requires using information found in archives such as the artist files at the Musée d’Orsay.
 * 3) Once I will have enriched the biographies in French Sculpture Census, is there a Wikipedia import/upload process that would allow to create artist entries in bulk and not individually? Do they have a spreadsheet pre-formatted to fit their database schema?Templeshipley (talk) 22:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've numbered these for convenience. My answers:
 * 1) The article name should be specified. A link would be great, but I don't think it's required.
 * 2) "Can we just copy an existing biography and give the source?" - no, unless it's out of copyright, in which case it is probably too old to be much use. Though you may notice that our existing bios rely far too much on Encyclopedia Britannica 1911. Short quotes may be ok, but essentially you need to rewrite.
 * 3) Not one for me - Jane? Johnbod (talk) 22:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * For (1) and (2) I agree with Johnbod. To reach a more international audience you may want to try linking out to Wikidata with a thrulink to the user's language (if you support multilanguages on your website, or if you plan to). As for (3) the answer is no, you cannot automatically upload information to Wikipedia. That said, I am a huge fan of copy/paste from websites and sources that are public domain and I do a lot of semi-automatic edits myself using public domain sources. But no matter how much I try to automate my process there is still a lot of handwork and double-checking involved. Wikidata on the other hand, is a great place to stuff useful links and machine-readable data and automatic edits and item creations are encouraged with the assistance of lots of tools. Once in Wikidata, there are various tools to help you build short Wikipedia stubs in various languages. So to get structured information on Wikipedia the workflow is bit different than you may have imagined. All I can say is that you must also trust in the crowd sourcing model, and with the BBC Your Paintings we have seen lots of edits due to people discovering works of art hosted there that can't be hosted in the Wikiverse. I hope you are also aware of our copyright policies - we can't host all images of sculptures. Public Domain artists are those who have been dead for 70 years and their art was made (published) more than 90 years ago. On rare occasions artists or their descendants have given Wikipedia permission to host images of their art, but this is a tiny minority. Mix-n-Match can be used to update all items with links to your database where you can host such images. That is easy if we create a Wikidata property for that. You need permission from the Wikidata community, but generally this is not too difficult for the arts, and like I said, we need more sculpture databases, so I think this is possible. Jane (talk) 07:34, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

E-flux and E-flux publications
Perhaps somebody from this project can have a look at these two articles. Looks to me that are partly duplicative and overly detailed. The references need perhaps some checking, too. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, User:Randykitty, I'm working on this!Morelcasares (talk)

Article request: Frank Zachary
Hi all. Just read this really interesting obituary on celebrated magazine editor, art director, and pioneer in graphic arts Frank Zachary (1914-2015). Thought someone from this project might enjoy creating an article on him. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Suvigya Sharma
Suvigya Sharma may be notable enough for the article, but the current draft desperately needs cleanup due to the tone and the unsourced content, and some additional references would likely also be necessary. Atulkumar.1990 asked me for help on the IRC help channel, but I'm too busy with other issues, too little of a subject-matter expert and not interested enough in the topic to work on that draft to the extent that's required. Atulkumar.1990 himself has a conflict of interest and finds it difficult to write neutrally about Sharma. Help would be appreciated. Huon (talk) 16:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Very doubtful notability imo, & almost none of it has refs. Johnbod (talk) 17:38, 27 June 2015 (UTC)


 * There are a few news articles about his work, for example this and this about his 2013 exhibition (the latter with a tiny bit of biographical info). Then there is the 2014 article about an exhibition that was opened by a celeb(?). A short article with these sources might get a "Weak keep" from me at a deletion discussion. However, rewriting the article would entail removing 90% of it, with no guarantee that his brother doesn't come back and make it into an edit battleground. In my view, if it is only his own brother that feels strongly enough to write about him, he may not be as notable as he likes to think! I'm going to pass. Sionk (talk) 21:05, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC - Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)
There's currently an open RfC on a topic that may be of interest to readers of this wikiproject.--BoboMeowCat (talk) 03:14, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

New category for paintings of Esther
There was agreement at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_30 to allow new a sub-cat to be created for articles on paintings that are currently in, and files in. I proposed Category:Paintings of Esther within Category:Paintings with biblical themes. However, argued for, in the expectation that articles will be created on sculptures/drawings/prints etc of Esther.

This precaution looks unnecessary to me. Commons:Category:Esther has engravings, tapestries and reliefs as well as paintings, but none that look as if they will get their own article, so I don't see a strong likelihood of needing the wider category in English Wikipedia. If we create the "in art" category for the paintings, they can of course also be categorised in Category:Paintings with biblical themes, but an intersection category (Paintings of Esther) looks to me as if it would be neater and sufficient. However, I'll be happy to bow to the preference of this project. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've given my view there. It's a real weakness of our art categories that we set up "paintings" categories when we should set up "art" ones, with sub-cats for paintings when they get big. They can then be parented in Category:Art depicting Old Testament figures. I wish more people here took part in debates at WP:CFD. Whenever art subjects come up the decisions made are often really poor.  Johnbod (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, if nobody else from this project chimes in within a couple more days, I'll go ahead with the category I proposed. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:16, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. I was mistaken about the subjects of the files in ; these are now in Category:Works based on the book of Esther. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:26, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Dispute at Counter-Maniera
There is a dispute on relatively minor style and comprehensiveness issues here that has been dragging on absurdly. The remaining issues are seen in the diff here. Comments welcome at Talk:Counter-Maniera. Several sections above refer, but perhaps just a view on the diff I've given is all that is needed. Some issues have been resolved. Johnbod (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission
Could anyone assess this artist's notability? Thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Seems to have lots of RS. Why not? Pelarmian (talk) 19:21, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Also Draft:Vladimir Teplukhin. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:31, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * More doubtful: most of the text is from his website. Pelarmian (talk) 19:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposed renaming Category:Found art to Category:Found object
I have nominated "Category:Found art" to be renamed "Category:Found object". Please weigh in there. Bus stop (talk) 13:42, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Kim Jong-un
Yes, Kim Jong-un. We need a new lead image. Who here draws or paints well?

The current image in Kim Jong-un is used at many other language Wikipedias. So are other images we have at commons.

We could use a really great, new piece that could never be seen as a derivative of a photo. If it is good, it would certainly become the new, lead image across the whole project because none of the images we have now are that great.

Who here can tolerate staring at Kim Jong-un's face while breathing paint fumes for an hour? Who can rise to the challenge!?!?!? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Visiting scholar with Smithsonian Institution, focus on Modern African art and artists

 * See Wikipedia:Visiting Scholars/Apply &bull; Lingzhi&diams;(talk) 04:53, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Notable artist
Draft:(Martha) Dewing Woodward. Appears notable. Needs improved referencing, don't you reckon? 3 citations are used throughout all the text. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:49, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Why is the first name in parentheses? Is that how she stylized her name or did she not use her first name. If the latter, than the article should be called by her common name with the first line identifying the full name. No opinion yet on notability, but this does appear to be notable.  freshacconci  talk to me  18:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Source and artist of painting of Alexander, Bucephalus and Diogenes?
Reference desk/Humanities -- Jeandré, 2011-06-02t17:38z

Wiki Loves Pride
 You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!


 * What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
 * When? June 2015
 * How can you help?
 * 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
 * 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
 * 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa


 * Adding a timestamp so the section archives properly. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:20, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Nighthawks
Bus stop (talk) 03:50, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Columbia University sculptures
I've identified a few sculptures on the Columbia University (NYC) campus without Wikipedia articles, if any project members are interested in helping: --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * John Howard Van Amringe (sculpture)
 * Letters (sculpture)
 * Life Force (sculpture)
 * Tight Rope Walker (sculpture)
 * Three-Way Piece: Points

Arts and Crafts movement
Can I make a request for collaborators on this article? I'm the major contributor, having made over 200 edits, but I'd like some help. It's an important topic in the history of art, and the article gets 400-600 views a day, but it's far from complete. The topic is large, covering the most influential movement in decorative arts in Europe and north America between 1880 and 1910, with significant precursors in the previous three decades and resonances down to the present. I peck at it occasionally but I have a busy life outside Wikipedia and can't devote as much time to it as it deserves. Thanks. Pelarmian (talk) 10:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Rfc concerning use of galleries
There is currently an RfC about the use of galleries at the article Paul Signac. It is about whether we should be using legacy gallery formats because they "allows each work the dignity they demand...". -- CFCF  🍌 (email) 13:03, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate and welcome visual art editors comments there ...Modernist (talk) 13:05, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, more comments please - this is likely to turn into a precedent. I hope we are not facing a new infobox war! Johnbod (talk) 15:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Issues needing attention
I've got some open issues needing attention for anyone familiar with Renoir's early work over at Talk:Lise (Renoir). Thanks in advance. Viriditas (talk) 23:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Help us add artworks to Commons or Wikidata
Lot's of Wikipedians go on vacation in August and find themselves behind a keyboard without their usual tools ready. If you are looking for something useful to do that doesn't require a lot of cross-referencing, try adding an existing image file from Commons to a Wikidata item for museum collections. For example, this list of paintings in the Philadelphia Museum of Art could use some illustrations from Commons. If you are interested in paintings, maybe you would like to join the w:Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings. If you hate Wikidata, maybe you would be interested in just contributing images to Commons from museum websites, or even setting up a WikiProject Visual arts/Sum of all paintings page that just lists museums and their collection trees (paintings by period or movement). Wikidatans will find and appreciate your work in either place, I assure you. Jane (talk) 09:04, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Sad news - User:Paul Barlow (Paul B)
I've just seen that Paul has died. He was a professional art historian, specializing in the Pre-Raphaelites; among other things he published a book on John Everett Millais (Barlow, Paul Time Present and Time Past: The Art of John Everett Millais, Ashgate 2005). Most of his WP work was not on art, but he maintained the key Pre-Raphaelite articles, and contributed to many others. He will be sorely missed. Messages can be added to his talk page (better than here). He must have been relatively young too - BA 1983. Johnbod (talk) 00:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

American art articles
FYI, there is a notice at WT:USA about some recent changes to redirects and new articles to American art articles -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note! To save people's time, I've copied the note there & my response Johnbod (talk) 12:27, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

(copied from US proj) There is someone removing redirects and pointing all the articles about Art in the United states to a bunch of circular lists that they have created.
 * Art of the United States was a redirect to Visual art of the United States
 * It essentially lists every artist in that article and links to
 * Colonial American Art which is a list
 * 18th-century American Art which is a list
 * 19th-century American Art which is a list
 * Previously American art went to the disambiguation page American art (disambiguation) but it is now redirected to Art of the United States

The major articles Visual art of the United States, Music of the United States, Cuisine of the United States are being unlinked and added to the bottoms of these pages as misc "See also" articles.

Dunno if anyone cares, just pointing it out.--Savonneux (talk) 12:25, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is a problem. I have restored some of the old links and redirects, but not tackled the period lists, which something needs to be done about - perhaps just deletion. WP:FORK applies. Wikiproject Visual art certainly care - that should have been notified, & I will copy all this there. Johnbod (talk) 12:22, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirected the 3 period ones too Johnbod (talk) 11:56, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Eyes needed...
China: Through the Looking Glass is a new article on an exhibition that is notable, but it is suffering from synthesis issues in the Orientalism section (which is a problem, because that's the crux of the whole installation). Particularly, there is mention of Edward Said's book and some material cited from it that is not actually referenced in any of the sources - Said is generally, but only in one source, and his book is not. Can someone take a look at it? I can't because I'm an involved editor on another of the article creator's articles. MSJapan (talk) 05:09, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Question about how to write an article about an art group that changed its name several times.
Hi, I stumbled across the work of a member of the French art nouveau group Les Cinq and wrote a wiki entry for him (it's in the AFC process now) but I noticed that Les Cinq, the art group rather than the music group, didn't have a wiki article either. Writing it isn't the problem so much as the group went from being Les Cinq to Les Six to becoming the L'Art pour tous movement. What would be the best way to structure an article about the group? Any advice gratefully received. Red Fiona (talk) 18:22, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Given the potential for confusion, I'd be tempted to use the unique "L'Art pour tous", but of course explaining the others. Johnbod (talk) 18:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick reply. I think you're right, that is the right way forward.  Thanks again Red Fiona (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Fair use
I noticed that the Harry Sternberg article has no image of his work. I tried to find an image with a commons license that could be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, but could find nothing that meets their licensing requirements. Would adding a fair use image be possible under the circumstances? Kwork2 (talk) 14:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Since he's not a living person, fair use images of him personally are presumably not replaceable with free ones, meaning a fair use image is likely reasonable. There's still the burden of showing that the image adds significantly to the article, and that'd depend on the context of any particular image. {&#123; Nihiltres &#8202;&#124;talk&#8202;&#124;edits}&#125; 15:30, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I tend to think that having a minimum of one image of any artist's work would significantly improve the article. Is that an incorrect assumption? I was thinking of this image which is a 1935 lithograph from the Library of Congress site, and which from the appearance and date might have been done for the Federal Art Project. Kwork2 (talk) 15:47, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The specific criterion to satisfy is "contextual significance"; see Wikipedia:Non-free content § Meeting the contextual significance criterion. "Improves the article" isn't enough, as I read it. Including specific commentary on how the example is typical of Sternberg's work would probably be enough, though. {&#123; Nihiltres &#8202;&#124;talk&#8202;&#124;edits}&#125; 17:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, essentially that's it. Johnbod (talk) 18:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Cor Melchers
I created the page Cor Melchers, however I don't know (as I'm not into art..) if this painter is notable enough to have his own wiki page. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 22:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * probably not, frankly. Johnbod (talk) 03:58, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

A student writes
Hi, I was hoping to use these sources in my upcoming editing could I have some feed back on them thank you!

Contreraslizbeth (talk) 04:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure any really take the article beyond what it already has, & apart from EB they are not really WP:RS. Don't you have access to the Grove Encyclopedia? I'm sure that would be better. Any textbook on Greek sculpture would be good for that, and Hartt etc for the Renaissance. Johnbod (talk) 05:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Paint Brands
I am looking for some veteran advice on when a company that manufactures art supplies is worthy of an article on Wikipedia. Winsor & Newton, Liquitex, and Golden Artist Colors all meet some criteria. There are lesser companies that have slipped by and I won't mention them here for fear of removal. But I do want to read about the different brands (how old they are, where they are located, what their philosophy is).

Could we create a page like "Art supplies companies" that might go into more detail about companies that can't have their own article? Bod (talk) 18:12, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, the article I tried to create was M. Graham. Bod (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Not my project
I'm not sure about this PROD, so I would like a project member (or more) to review the PROD on Eva raboso. It clearly would need to be moved if it was kept, and the sources seem good. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So now you're reviewing all my edits? Thanks, I guess. (I do have this page watchlisted, so it doesn't go both ways.) If you're out to paint me, paint away. You're on the right project for it! :-)


 * I agree that there are more third-party sources there than I realized (I saw one; maybe there are two--so many of the links are duplicates of each other). One of the repeated "third-party" pages simply mentions their involvement in an exhibition or group as part of a long list. I didn't notice much independent coverage online, and circumstantially there is no Spanish wiki entry. Anyway, I've removed the proposed deletion tag and y'all can do what you want. Outriggr (talk) 07:10, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Eyes needed
Re: User:Hexatekin/sandbox/JNH: I would appreciate if someone was able to review this article about a well-known contemporary art archivist and add it if they deem it to meet Wikipedia's standards. Let me know if you have questions! Hexatekin (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Just about notable I think, but not many references. Johnbod (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Barely notable. Apart from the interview it seems unlikely any of the sources are about him. For example the personal family biographical info is completely unsourced. Sionk (talk) 23:27, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Noah's Ark in art
I just created Noah's Ark, but was not able to find any notable depictions of Noah's Ark in art. I find it surprising that there is no work of art with its own article depicting this subject. Let me know if I missed something.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:55, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Draft Article Check
Hello again,

I wrote the article mentioned in this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts#Question_about_how_to_write_an_article_about_an_art_group_that_changed_its_name_several_times.) question, and was wondering if any of you would be kind enough to give it a quick look through to see how it could be improved.

The draft is here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Art_dans_Tout

Thanks, Red Fiona (talk) 18:50, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

FA nom
I've nominated Migration of the Serbs for FA but it hasn't gotten too much feedback as of yet. If anyone is interested in providing comments on how the article can be improved they can be added here. Look forward to all constructive criticism. 23 editor (talk) 21:24, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Piano burning
Does piano burning only involve uprights, or does it also include baby grands, and grand pianos? -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 06:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Student project
Please all keep an eye on the articles at 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
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 " instead of "added an external link" then the people who patrol new edits will be much more likely to leave you alone.  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  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 " 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  at the front, thus: en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Archive_16 Noyster  (talk),  14:34, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

'New' article Uppspretta
'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)

"Life of Christ"
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?
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)

Guidance
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 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)

New category question: Should there be a category for the location of a painting or painting collection?
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?
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
See Talk:History_of_Eastern_art, 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
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, 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. Thanks. Murph 9000 (talk) 05:36, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

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

Simone da Bologna

 * Simone da Bologna an Italian painter of the 14th century period. Also called ‘’Simone dai Crocifissi’’.
 * Simone dei Crocifissi Simone di Filippo Benvenuti, known as Simone dei Crocifissi (Bologna, about 1330 - Bologna, 1399), was an Italian painter.

I think these two articles are about the same person, as both articles mention that there is a triptych by Simone da Bologna in the Blanton Art Museum in Austin, Texas. But before starting an AfD, I thought I'd ask here, just in case. The first article is a stub which draws on an 1885 catalogue, but has some additional information that may need to be merged into the more substantial second. --Hillbillyholiday talk 15:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sure this is right - eg see this. I'll merge. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 15:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers, John. We don't want this Bolognese doppelganger messing up the joint. --Hillbillyholiday talk 16:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Baroque draughtsmen has been nominated for discussion
Category:Baroque draughtsmen, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Raises some interesting questions about the definition of 'draughtsman'. Thank you. Sionk (talk) 12:26, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Women's History Month worldwide online edit-a-thon
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 08:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Feedback request - I would like to create an article on MAVO, a radical Japanese art collective from the 1920's
I would like to create an article on MAVO, a radical Japanese art collective active throughout the 1920's into the early 1930's. There is a draft in my sandbox here, and it would be great if others would take a look at it first. Also, I need help with disambiguating the word MAVO - both MAVO and Mavo redirect to an obscure article about a Dutch educational track, here. Thanks! Netherzone (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * To me, since I grew up in the Netherlands, MAVO is anything but obscure. From 1968 to 1999 it was one of the most common educational tracks in the Netherlands. The problem with the MAVO link is that redirects to an article that is not really about MAVO at all, but about its successor, the Voorbereidend middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, or VMBO. I'm not sure how you'd resolve this; I suppose you could replace MAVO, put a hatnote in the article about the art movement and link to Voorbereidend_middelbaar_beroepsonderwijs for the Dutch educational track. One thing to note is that like mulo, the predecessor of MAVO is a disambiguation page and that Meer Uitgebreid Lager Onderwijs has its own article, just like Voorbereidend_middelbaar_beroepsonderwijs. To me that suggests that MAVO should be a disambiguation page with a link to Middelbaar algemeen voortgezet onderwijs, which someone should probably translate from nl:Middelbaar algemeen voortgezet onderwijs. Wouldn't it be easier to create MAVO (avant-garde movement), similar to COBRA (avant-garde movement) instead? Mduvekot (talk) 01:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's worthwhile even in its present state, which is a lot better than the dismal article (MAVO) in Japanese-language Wikipedia. Mavo currently redirects to Voorbereidend middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, another terrible article (it has no sources whatever), and one that doesn't even mention "Mavo". I agree with what most of Mduvekot says, except perhaps that "MAVO (art movement)" (and "COBRA (art movement)") might be better titles. Once you've moved your draft to article-space (with whichever title), don't worry about the technicalities of redirection: if you can't fix it, note this on my talk page and I'll do it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Jewish Visual Arts?
Curious why the "Visual Arts" Project on wikipedia uses a Jewish symbol??? 73.220.34.167 (talk) 01:57, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * More Hindu I think. Johnbod (talk) 04:13, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's Jewish.73.220.34.167 (talk) 03:58, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * A hamsa, not uniquely Jewish. Pelarmian (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Everyone knows this to be a Jewish symbol and it seems inappropriate here. Just because Catholics use the Star of David in some of their art, it would not warrant saying the symbol is not entirely Jewish...73.220.34.167 (talk) 03:58, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Addition of images to multiple articles
I've reverted most of these edits, and explained why at the user's talk page. No evidence that these are especially significant, or even that they're authentic, just claims that they're from a private collection. Extra eyes on this will be appreciated. Thanks, 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:10, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Concerning absences in Lists of painters by nationality
I have added in a new missing countries from the Lists of painters by nationality list, but I'm a bit concerned about the number of pages there that do not yet exist. Australia and New Zealand are both non-existent, for example. It would be great if we could work together to create some new list pages so that this information can be better organized and more international. Thanks :) Clawsyclaw (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Trouble finding references? The Wikipedia Library is proud to announce ...
 The Wikipedia Library

There are up to 30 free one-year Alexander Street Press (ASP) accounts available to experienced Wikipedians through this partnership. To apply for free access, please go to WP:ASP.

Alexander Street Press is an electronic academic database publisher. Its "Academic Video Online: Premium collection" includes videos in a range of subject areas, including news programs (like 60 minutes) and newsreels, music and theatre, speeches and lectures and demonstrations, and documentaries. This collection would be useful for researching topics related to science, engineering, history, music and dance, anthropology, business, counseling and therapy, news, nursing, drama, and more. Cheers! 22:28, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Review expertise needed at Draft:Calligraffiti
This looks to be a pretty valid subject, but it could be more encyclopedic, and I'm not sure how valid a good chunk of the references are, though this term does appear in various books and news articles so seems legit. Anyone able to drop in and help advise the original editor on getting this AFC draft ready for publication? MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Women artists → Women in art
See talk:Women artists for the discussion requesting that the article be renamed -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 07:27, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Talos No. 2
If anyone has time to spare, I could use a little help with this article, which I hope to promote to Good status. I think the sculpture was completed between 1959 and 1968, but source sources give 1977 as the date. Some sources say the sculpture was first installed in 1968, others say it has been on the Transit Mall since 1977. I am confused as to which dates I should use for the sculpture's completion and installation. If someone has the time, interest, and patience to review this article and poke around some of the sources, I'd appreciate another pair of eyes. It is not a long article, and there are not too many sources to scan. The article should be close to meeting GA criteria once this issue is resolved. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Women in photography
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

New photos available of Italian artists


I'm happy to inform you that now we have thousands of new photos of art in Italy, also contemporary art, thanks to the donation of the Paolo Monti digitalized archive by the BEIC Foundation (who acquired the full archive in 2008 and has the full rights). Paolo Monti was a famous photographer from Milan and shoot the photos with permission by artists and galleries, for catalogues and magazines. All those beautiful images now need only to be used in Wikipedia articles (examples in Marino Marini (sculptor), Lucio Fontana, and it:Gianni Dova). Do you like to help us? See the category on Commons of artworks, Artists' studios, Portraits of artists and a selected gallery. Thank you! --Marco Chemello (BEIC) (talk) 09:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this - some very nice stuff here! Johnbod (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Europeana Art Challenge
The Europeana Art Challenge has kicked off and runs until 30th May.

The aim is to make sure that there are Wikidata entries and Wikipedia articles for each of the 300 artworks chosen from across Europe.

Details of the competition and how to sign up are here.

As of writing only 58 out of 300 artworks have an article in English (some examples below for ideas).

There's a points based system and prizes for the most points for each country.

Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 16:17, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * ??All these have articles - two of them are featured? Johnbod (talk) 03:34, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 File:Eugène Delacroix - La liberté guidant le peuple.jpg|Liberty Leading the People by Eugène Delacroix File:Las Meninas, by Diego Velázquez, from Prado in Google Earth.jpg|Las Meninas by Diego Velázquez File:El Tres de Mayo, by Francisco de Goya, from Prado in Google Earth.jpg|The Third of May 1808 by Francisco de Goya File:RAFAEL - Madonna Sixtina (Gemäldegalerie Alter Meister, Dresde, 1513-14. Óleo sobre lienzo, 265 x 196 cm).jpg|Sistine Madonna by Raphael 
 * Johnbod, Europeana did not choose the artworks and neither did Wikimedians. The artworks were reported to be top pieces from the various country cultural coordinators that normally work with Europeana. These works form a virtual exhibition on the Europeana website. As top works, it follows that Wikipedia would already have some top quality content on them. Sadly, we are missing many many more. I for one have been quite surprised by some of the works and find it sad to realize we don't even have information about some of these the artists on English Wikipedia, let alone other more Europe-based projects. Some of the gaps are predictable (copyrighted content is never popular on Wikipedia projects) but others are shameful (low-quality or black-and white images of works that have high quality images available, and so on). Jane (talk)
 * As of writing, 79% of the 300 artworks selected for the challenge don't have articles in English. The missing ones are listed at Wikidata:Wikidata:Europeana Art History Challenge/Data Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:09, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

The best way to see how far the progress is going on the English Wikipedia specifically is at this table. You can sort by the 'country' column to see how the 10 artworks that were selected by each country appear on en.wp. Some countries' selections are already have a bunch of articles, but none have all 10 (although several are close)! Of all the 40 languages being tracked as part of the project, English has unsurprisingly the largest number - having grown from 50 before the competition started to 130 now. There is also already a full compliment of Wikidata labels English which is great. Anyone who is interested in being involved in the challenge - and potentially winning some of the prizes on offer - is very welcome! Full details at the project page Wikidata:Europeana Art History Challenge. Wittylama 15:51, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * At the moment, 155 of the artworks have articles in English, up from 49 at the start of the competition. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 14:42, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Suspected hoax article: Pierre Dupont (painter)
(Apologies if this post is not in the best place.) I have tagged Pierre Dupont (painter) as a likely WP:HOAX, and made observations at Talk:Pierre Dupont (painter). I haven't initiated the WP:AFD procedure, because (a) I've never yet used it, and (b) I suppose I just might be wrong (though the original new-page reviewer agrees with my assessment). If I'm correct: this well-constructed joke has gone on long enough (I only found it because it had unluckily collected a tag), so could someone activate the AfD routine please? Narky Blert (talk) 21:31, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Another suspected hoax article: Ricardo N. Degrossi
I've flagged this article as a possible WP:HOAX, and posted my observations on the relevant talk page. If I'm wrong, feel free to slap me down; but until you do, I'm calling BS on it. (Even if it's genuine, which I doubt, I would invoke WP:GNG against the article.) Narky Blert (talk) 01:25, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Christian Hohmann
Hello visual arts experts. Here is a draft about an art gallery owner. There are many references, but I am not familiar with the media in this area and can't tell if they are appropriately independent and relevant. Any opinions? Should the draft be moved to mainspace?&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 08:50, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's in mainspace now, but with issues.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

GLAM/Wikidata art terms
I setup a new page that has a sister component on Wikidata for the people working on it from that end. We are trying to get a way of systematically defining artist occupations to improve existing biographies, and also defining artworks. Theoretically, this addresses the hatmaker/hat problem, and while I am at, I am calling out the hatmaking aspect as a potential link between the two. Wikidata page is here: d:Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure. Jane (talk) 20:58, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Article title help needed
Hallo, I've been asked for advice on an article title but it's not an area I know anything about so I thought I'd ask the members of this project. Please have a look at, previously Altarpiece of Veit Stoss, earlier Ołtarz Wita Stwosza. I tried Googling but by the time I'd found the church it's in referred to as "Church of the Virgin Mary in Krakow", "Krakow's basilica of the Virgin Mary", "The basilica of the Virgin Mary's (or Kosciol Mariacki) at Krakow’s central Grand Square", and "St. Mary's church in Krakow", all on one webpage, I gave up. There are only three individual altarpieces in Category:Altarpieces, which seems to suggest it's possibly not the right category or terminology - or that other altarpieces are wrongly categorised. Over to you. Pam D  17:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There seem to be more problems: Two of the entries in this category are "Altarpiece" and "Reredos"...


 * Reredos says it is an altarpiece, and is sometimes called a "retable".
 * Altarpiece says it can be divided into "Reredos" and "Retable".

It seems to me it would probably be best to end the confusion by merging these articles, with some pointers to which terms are most commonly used in different traditions. Unfortunately this is a field in which I have no specialised knowledge at all. Imaginatorium (talk) 18:07, 29 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I am not in favor of a merge. Reredos and retable are distinct terms. The Art and Architecture thesaurus gives the correct uses of each term. Mduvekot (talk) 11:43, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose merge. We have dozens, if not hundreds, of articles on altarpieces (most now detached from their setting and in museums), but clearly no-one has bothered to categorize them correctly since the category was set up 9 months ago. Veit Stoss altarpiece in Kraków is not ideal, but if there is no dominant alternative will do. The usage of these words is complex, and much confused by different usages in the European languages, leading to bad translations in guidebooks etc, not to mention (I think) different preferences within Anglicanism, depending on the wing, and between English-speaking Catholics and Protestants. I have reinstated retable, which some idiot had redirected to to reredos recently, quoting a foreign source. Getty is a start, but does not I think get to the bottom of matters - try the entry on "reredos" here. In practice, there is a great deal of overlap and imprecision in the usage of all of them. Johnbod (talk) 12:57, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I've done some work here, and on dossal, and will copy this to Talk:Reredos for the record. Johnbod (talk) 15:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Robert Beck (painter)
Newly created article via AfC. I've tried to do a bit of clean up, but mainly formatting stuff. I believe more needs to be done since the tone is a bit promotional sounding and the sourcing is a bit sketchy. Would someone from WPVA mind taking a closer look and assessing the article? Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:55, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Looted art
I find this latest edit by, an wp:SPA to to be removing more critical information then needed. Whitewashing, perhaps? Also, the cites seem to be of marginal reliability. I have little familiarity on the topic. More eyes on this might be a good idea. I will not be watching this page. Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 03:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Truth Editor's response: Jim, thanks for that. If you make a hard study of the case cited (not many people have done so) you will see that it was the Thai dealer who purchased and sold the piece. As is also mentioned, he has clear evidence to back this up. The previous version of the article led on from the Sothebys case (wrongly interpreted - which is apparent if you simply read it...) to accuse him of being THE PERSON responsible for looting of South East Asian art. This is highly simplistic and is like taking 2 and 2 and reach 20. "Whitewashing" you say? Well what was the previous article? Who is Jason Felch to make those claims? I'm sure if you were to take the time to read all the citations presented (you cannot have done in the time since posting) you will understand that the situation is far more complex that the manner in which it was presented previously. What else is Wikipedia for if not for finding the truth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trutheditor100 (talk • contribs) 11:51, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Auto-assessment of article classes
Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.

If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ RobTalk 01:28, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd say no - we have never done importance ratings, and rightly so. This would just convert nearly everything to stub/start and low importance, except that things like Albanian art would become top importance (unless we can kill the "importance" bit, which I doubt. Johnbod (talk) 15:39, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, apparently this doesn't do "imortance" ratings, so should be ok. Johnbod (talk) 13:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


 * After a few days, there appears to be some support and no opposition to opting in. You may want to consider listing this project at User:BU RoBOT/autoassess to opt-in. I'm unfollowing this project page, so please ping me if anyone has any questions that require the bot operator's response. ~ RobTalk 17:01, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I think its a good idea. The tags will get auto=inherit which means its easy to find the talk pages which have been auto tagged. We have 2,528 uanassesed articles. Christian75 (talk) 20:41, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Any objection to ask for auto assessment? Christian75 (talk) 10:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Method of displaying images
This proposal at the Village Pump asks whether galleries by default should be displayed in "packed" mode. Bus stop (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Charles Hinman
I have tried to fix this SPA-created article (from a mostly technical point of view as layman), but it still contains a lot of arts magazine jargon and redundant details from the artist's own point of view. I am also not convinced, that all of the sources are perfectly unbiased (but that may be a minor problem, if the article's tone would be more encyclopedic). It would be great, if someone else more knowledgeable in modern painting could have a second look over the article. GermanJoe (talk) 07:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Abdolrez Daryabeigi
Somewhere, I came across Draft:Mir Abdolrez Daryabeigi, about a modern Iranian painter (abstract landscapes), and tried to help its creator get into acceptable shape. I know nothing about modern painting, but it seems to me that the subject is notable. However I have found the task harder than I anticipated, because I have no familiarity with what might be acceptable sources, and cannot read Farsi. So I am hoping that someone here can have a look at it. Maproom (talk) 07:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC) I did not submit any document in Farsi language. As for French source I will notify artfinding.com which is French website that Wikipedia think the Grand Palais is not a reliable source. If you insist on having a easy access source.Mirrezd (talk) 05:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC) All the prizes that Mr. Daryabeigi won were issued by Grand PalaisIt is very popular in art world.
 * the Credibility of Grand Palais is the same level as museum of Louver.(in the case editors would like to expand their knowledge)Mirrezd (talk) 15:48, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's more like the Royal Academy in London, hosting exhibitions of various sorts. Having a work exhibited there does not go all that far towards demonstrating notabily by itself. But an entry in Benezit should be enough. Johnbod (talk) 15:57, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Mr. Daryabeigi not only had many exhibitions in Grand Palais he also won two prizes in 1982 and 1989. respectively. The prize was to buy the participant painting. Mr. Daryabiegi's paintings are part of Grand Palais collection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrezd (talk • contribs) 03:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC) Mirrezd (talk) 03:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Assistance with images for Harry Jackson (artist) article
Normally I would not ask for priority or rushed assistance for an edit request, but I received three talk page notifications informing me that the three images I've proposed adding to Harry Jackson (artist) will be deleted in a few days if they are not added to the article before then. Is there a project member who is willing to respond to the edit request I posted at Talk:Harry Jackson (artist) before these images are deleted? Thank you for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:32, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The images have been added to the article. I've marked this section as resolved. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)