Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Archive 17

Page to watch
Media Art Histories was created in late 2015. I'd never noticed it but I recently saw a posting on facebook announcing its creation. Full disclosure, I'm part of that facebook group and this is an area of research I'm engaged in (in real life). If you can't follow the link, it says: "Welcome to the new MEDIA ART HISTORIES Wikipedia page, your reference portal for exploring the interdisciplinary research into NEW MEDIA ART!"

I'm going to guess that it's mostly harmless, but the page itself has many problems (WP:OR, tone, etc). Others may want to stop by and help out. I don't believe it warrants deletion, although a name change to Media art history (singular, lowercase) may be best. I think it's a valid topic but the page needs more work than I can devote at this time. My main worry is that it may devolve into POV issues and more original research by well-meaning editors who may not understand how Wikipedia works and it currently is probably not on too many watchlists.  freshacconci  talk to me  17:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help out, but the situation is confusing. Cubitt and Thomas (Relive: Media Art Histories) and Grau (MediaArtHistories) both use the term "Media Art Histories" and not "Media art history", in their book titles, but are signatory to the manifesto that refers to the field as "Media art history". So, which is it, and why is one more authoritative than the other? Mduvekot (talk) 18:29, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If there are no objections, I'm copying this discussion to the article talk page. Hopefully, a discussion can happen there about improving the article.  freshacconci  talk to me  14:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk: Non-free content
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk: Non-free content. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 06:28, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Draft being rejected
Hi There, I need help in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:R_Nandakumar This article is being repeatedly rejected - and the reason mentioned is:" This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability." R Nandakumar is a noted Indian art historian and cultural critic. He was granted the prestigious Senior Nehru Fellow at Teen Murti Bhawan, New Delhi. He was the first recipient of the Kesari Memorial Award Instituted by the Department of Culture, Government of Kerala in the year 2007, conferred in recognition of his contribution to the study of art, culture and music. Many a reputed scholars have cited his works in their articles and publications. His articles and research papers have been published by reputed magazines and publications. He has very limited online reference, however, I have made a list of citations by other reputed scholars to the likes of Christopher Pinney, with proper publication details and page number. Request your help here. Thank you, Tiru Tiru Tiru Tirutirutiru (talk) 03:15, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * You need to quote some nice things said about him and his importance, for example in reviews of his books. Johnbod (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I made an attempt at fixing the article. The biggest problem you have is that the sources are primary sources; articles Nandakumar wrote are not good sources for an article about him. You need to cite what other people say about him. What doesn't help you is that you use a lot words that are considered puffery. It also doesn't help that you add a lot of trivial details, like being a member of a committee. Every academic I know at some point is a member of a committee; a Wikipedia article is not a curriculum vitae. The overuse of capitalization reinforces the impression that I, and perhaps other reviewers, get that you try to inflate his importance. As has been pointed out to you, you really should take into account the notability criteria for academics at WP:PROF. If you keep resubmitting the article without addressing the concerns of the reviewers, the article will simply be rejected again, and the reviewers might think that you are not listening. I hope this helps.Mduvekot (talk) 15:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Lee Tompkins
This article on an artist has been tagged "Notability" since 2008. I'm wondering if someone would be interested in looking at it and deciding whether the article should be improved or proposed for deletion, Thank you. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:16, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Featured Article Proposal Comments: St. Peter's Basilica
I have nominated St. Peter's Basilica for Featured article status. Its entry is listed at Featured article candidates/St. Peter's Basilica/archive1, where you can leave your comments. All comments are appreciated and the more there are, the more quickly it can be promoted or the nomination closed.  Ergo Sum  22:04, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Experts needed at Minimalism
An experts needed tag was added to the minimalism article. From what I gather on the take page, it mainly concerns the content on architecture and design, and that the article is somewhat disorganized and repetitive. This should probably be considered a major project goal as it is an important article. Bare in mind that there is a minimalism (visual arts) article that was split off from the main article.  freshacconci  talk to me  15:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Oxford Art
There are some free articles available that may be of interest to project members. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:33, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * And anyone in the UK should be able to access the whole lot at home for free via their lacal library. Johnbod (talk) 02:43, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

"Sculptures by artist" or "Sculpture by artist"
Please share your thoughts in this discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 15:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Undiscussed split of significant article
Most of Pottery of ancient Greece has been moved off to a new Ancient Greek vase painting (formerly a redirect to the other). I've made my views on this clear at this talk page section. Comments from others are invited. Johnbod (talk) 12:27, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Restitutions
Shouldn't there be a category for restitutions like Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I? If so, what should it be named and what parent categories should go in there? Jane (talk) 11:20, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Alenia (Fine Art Artist)
A new user has created Alenia (Fine Art Artist), which has since been PRODded. I've no experience dealing with art topics, so I'm posting a note here in hopes that someone who does can review the article and see if the subject is notable. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 12:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Fair use pictures of Ousmane Sow's sculptures
Could someone please upload at least one picture of one of his sculptures in fair use please?Zigzig20s (talk) 05:02, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Tate website
Last week the Tate revamped its website. Among the many changes that have been introduced, they have replaced the artist biographies pages on the site with the first paragraph of the artists' Wikipedia page. Obviously, they are fully entitled to do so but this has created a lot of circular references as many of the WP articles use the artists' Tate biography page as a reference. The biographies for artists without a Wikipedia page have also been deleted, but without any replacement. The Tate are currently inviting comments and feedback on the redesign of the site.14GTR (talk) 18:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You'd think that might make them less opposed to releasing any free images, but I expect not.... Thanks for the tip. What they say is "For around 100 artists Tate has authored biographies, but for the other artists there was little information to show here. We are now augmenting the Tate authored biography by showing the Wikipedia entry on tate.org.uk." Certainly you get both for Francis Bacon.  But I can't see any bio for eg John Opie (T Britain), who certainly has a WP one. Maybe they haven't finished.  Johnbod (talk) 00:37, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, — Delivered: 18:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Help with Dualistic models in art
Hello! Could someone take a look at Dualistic models in art? It is tagged as an orphan and as needing to be divided into sections. I tried dividing it into sections but couldn't really understand what the article is about. If someone could give it more of an encyclopedic touch, that would be much appreciated! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 20:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I had a look, and decided against adding the section headingss, although they are pretty obvious (Goethe, Wölfflin, Itten, Read and Worringer). The article looks like mostly original research to me, and I don't see that there is a good scholarly source for dualism in art as a topic. Potential AfD candidate, if you ask me. Mduvekot (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Altarpiece, reredos, retable?
Hi, There's a discussion going on at wikimedia commons (here) which would benefit greatly from the input from native English speakers or those with a good knowledge of specific Christian terms. The question is, what is the difference between an altarpiece, a reredos and a retable. It would be great if it could be sorted out and the commons and Wikipeida made consistent. Thank you! Yakikaki (talk) 18:25, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

‎Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 September 1
I invite you to the ongoing FFD discussion about cover arts of Tales of Eternia. --George Ho (talk) 05:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Help reviewing article on artist GH Rothe
I've been writing an article on artist GH Rothe, renowned for her work with mezzotint, but who also had a body of work that was only recently discovered by her son Peter Rothe. I have talked several times with him, and assisted the exhibition of some of these new works at the San Francisco Art Institute. I've been asked to review "peacock" language, which I did, but I want to make sure that it's OK before I resubmit the article for review. Here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gatja_Helgart_Rothe

Thanks!

Juan Pablo Pacheco 21:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanppacheco (talk • contribs)


 * You may want to think about stripping out extraneous wording. Exact birth & death dates can go into an inbox template, along with her alternate name. The lead paragraph could be leaner...

Gatja Helgart Rothe, (b. 1935 d. 2007) was a German-American artist known for printmaking, drawing and painting. After living and working in Europe, she briefly traveled through South America before moving to New York City in the 1970s and later California, where she developed her mature work. Her artwork has been exhibited in galleries, and placed in several private collections in the U.S., Europe and Japan. She developed technical innovations in the mezzotint process to explore spiritual and philosophical inquiries of the meaning of trauma and migration.

Netherzone (talk) 06:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Netherzone, can you fix the error in formatting the quote? It is affecting the below content. George Ho (talk) 08:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * User:George Ho I'm not exactly sure what you are asking, but I'm removing the indent on my original post and the html markup in my answer to you. I'm guessing you may be wanting to copy and paste from here? Let me know if that helps with what you are trying to do. Netherzone (talk) 15:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposal to delete all categories for Colossal statues
at the link above. Please comment. Happy New Year to all! Johnbod (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Sources & custom Google search
A while back, I put together a custom Google search that only indexes reliable arts publications here. Perhaps it can be useful to others, especially when searching for coverage to save articles at AfD. I could also use some help finding other reliable sources to index in the search, particularly in niche visual arts and sites that focus on arts more broadly (but still have a reputation for fact-checking/editorial reliability). If there is interest, we could also start vetting sources à la other WikiProjects. czar 22:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a great idea. I often use my Artforum subscription. I'm in Canada, so I also refer to Canadian Art, Border Crossings, and C Magazine. I also read Kunstforum International, Flash Art, Texte zur Kunst, Frieze, and nl:Metropolis M (magazine) How can I see what your query does? Mduvekot (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Go here and try a query (e.g., an artist name). If there's interest in collaborating on the source list, I can post the sites I included similar to WP:VG/CSE czar  03:09, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Missing topics list
My list of missing painter articles is updated - Skysmith (talk) 12:26, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

WP:VA artist with almost no works on WP
The following five WP:VA listed artists have virtually no works articles on WP: Wassily Kandinsky, Georgia O'Keeffe, Frederic Remington, Gerhard Richter, and Aubrey Beardsley. There are painters that I have barely heard of who have articles for dozens of their works. Can some of you guys start helping us to understand the most important works for these artists.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:03, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * That's a good point. I don't know if you're doing this outreach because you intend to create five works articles - and are just looking for input. If you want help, though, I would be interested in working on either O'Keefe or Beardsley.— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 06:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I was checking on Navbox existence for all the WP:VA painters and those are the only 5 left without them (after I created Franz Marc, Paul Klee, Jackson Pollock, Georges Seurat, Hokusai, Hiroshige today). However, you need content to put in a navbox.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:58, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * An article about an individual work of art should not just contain a recapitulation of material found in the article on the artist himself/herself. It should be largely about the work of art. This can be difficult to do but it is important because the work of art is presumably important. Therefore articles on individual works of art should be relatively spare and lean, with links to articles on the artist so that the reader can read about the artist in a separate article. I think it is a bad idea to create needlessly bloated articles. We should make use of our internal links to keep articles no more lengthy than need be. Bus stop (talk) 07:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Gotcha, nice effort! If you want to start a Georgia O'Keefe template, so far I am only finding Jimson Weed and Blue and Green Music. If you're interested, I'm still game to work on some Georgia O'Keefe articles. I have thoughts about which articles to explore and actually prefer that to taking on a "Works of" article. And, I agree with Bus stop about only adding articles that are meaningful expansions of the main article and are particularly noteworthy works of art.— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 07:50, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't agree with CaroleHenson that the "main article" is the article about the artist. I think the "main article" is the article about the work of art, but great minds can quibble. Bus stop (talk) 07:58, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's funny to me for some reason. I like your thinking. Found another O'Keeffe painting, Cow's Skull: Red, White, and Blue. If I find any more, I'll group them together and most them on your talk page, Tony the Tiger.— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 08:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Although this is going too far (in the way of leanness). Bus stop (talk) 08:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Like some others, that used to be a much longer copyvio. Easy to rewrite using the source as ref, I think. Johnbod (talk) 16:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is a copyvio based on the two of three sources I was able to access. Bus stop (talk) 17:09, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Anybody know what a "frog blossom" is? I don't know if this is vandalism or not. Bus stop (talk) 17:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 'frog' should be 'four', See http://www.georgiaokeeffe.net/jimson-weed.jsp for example.Mduvekot (talk) 18:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * For Richter the best-known works tend to be series: 48 Portraits (1972) and the 15 paintings of the 18. Oktober 1977 cycle come to mind, and the series of Kerze from 1982. Among individual works maybe Ema (1966) and 256 Colors (1974). Ewulp (talk) 08:55, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * My point is that in order to create templates, I would like to have four link of direct relevance to the biographies of Wassily Kandinsky, Georgia O'Keeffe, Frederic Remington, Gerhard Richter, and Aubrey Beardsley. If you can add 2 more O'Keefe works, that would be great.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:07, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , I will work on some Georgia O'Keeffe articles and update the template.— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 20:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, if you could create subcats of Category:Paintings by artist for each of these artists and provide the proper text, context and linkages within the bio, it would be helpful.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Georgia O'Keeffe is now live.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have no idea if this would help at all, but I like finding stuff in wikidata, so I wrote a few queries that list all works by each artist, and which collection they are in. Wassily Kandinsky, Georgia O'Keeffe, Frederic Remington, Gerhard Richter, and Aubrey Beardsley. Click on the link, then press Run. Enjoy, Mduvekot (talk) 18:47, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * All works on Wikidata! Interestingly different results. Lots of Kandinsky in various European collections. 4 items for Beardsley. Johnbod (talk) 19:29, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I am misunderstanding this resource. Should I be able to identify works on en WP from this resource. When notes 4 items for Beardsley, I assume he can identify 4 en WP articles of relevance. I now see The Climax (illustration), Under the Hill, The Yellow Book based on a review of the article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't mean that; the Beardsley report had 4 items on it, that's all. I don't think you will be able to identify works on en WP from this resource. I presume some museum databases have been uploaded to Wikidatam but most not. I rather doubt Wikidata has much use for us, at this stage of its life anyway, but it's not my sort of thing at all. Johnbod (talk) 20:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Should I be able to identify works on en WP from this resource. Yes, if they exist the query results will show a link to the article about the work, which until I just edited the wikidata item for the Climax, wasn't the case. There were 4 wikidata items that had the property creator:Aubrey Beardsley. Now there are at least 5. If you look at the Gerhard Richter query, you'll notice that there is only one work that has an article, but there are 95 wikidata items for Richter's work. I can use queries like this to find works by Richter that have articles, but not in english wikipedia. Mduvekot (talk) 22:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * , I don't know much about art, but know a lot about WP. I was pointing out a few artists where we have not presented sufficient related material to support a navbox. These are fairly important subjects, so I thought people here might be able to do something. A list of works on wikidata don't help me unless it provides me with en WP articles. It appears that most of the works for these artists are without articles according to wikidata. This is just repeating what I said above that there are virtually no en WP articles for these subjects.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:18, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I understand that wikidata is not everybody's cup of tea, but this discussion lead me to look for paintings by Ribera for which we have articles in other languages, but not in English. I found a few, so we now have a new article on a painting by Ribera that I based on a translation from the Dutch and Spanish articles. (I'm still confused about how to acknowledge the contributions of the Spanish and Dutch editors BTW). Thanks for the inspiration! Mduvekot (talk) 16:46, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , kudos for article creation via translation.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:59, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Billie Nipper
Does anyone know of any art publications that might have reviewed her oil paintings? She was from middle Tennessee and was active from the 1970s until this year/her death. Article is at GA and while I found enough sources to definitely prove notability, I can't find any reviews of her work. She's most famous for painting horses, but did some landscapes and rural scenes as well. Thanks. White Arabian Filly Neigh 22:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)


 * , I don't know if there are any specific magazines or journals about artists who create works of art about horses or other animals or not. I did do a search in newspapers.com and found a few mentions, but nothing close to a review. Sorry,— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 01:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The review is over now and it passed, but thanks anyway. She was selected by the organizers of the World's Fair to paint a plate that was given to Ronald Reagan during his presidency, so I thought there might have been something out there about that. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 23:54, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Article name advice
I have looked through MOS:VATITLE to get figure out how to create a title for: a set of charcoal drawings made by Georgia O'Keeffe in 1915 that: 1) marked a major transition in the way that she created art (after introduction to Arthur Wesley Dow's principles / philosophy), 2) were included in her first exhibit in 1916, and 3) marked the initial development of her approach towards abstract art.

What seems to make most sense to me is: Charcoal drawings by Georgia O'Keeffe, 1915

Are there any issues with that title?— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 01:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Are you referring to the drawing such as No. 2 Special, No. 3 Special No. 4 Special? I believe some people have referred to those as "the Specials". Charcoal drawings by Georgia O'Keeffe, 1915 makes sense to me, as it is obvious which drawings are part of that set.-- previously unsigned by Mduvekot (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2017‎


 * Hi, Yep, sometimes they are called "Special" and sometimes just "Drawing"... but there are also Specials in the following years. Thanks to the link to other images!!!— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 02:31, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I'd incline to Charcoal drawings by Georgia O'Keeffe from 1915. Johnbod (talk) 13:40, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, I just saw this, I'll rename it.— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 00:18, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

R Nandakumar
Hi There,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:R_Nandakumar

Need help in this article. R Nandakumar is a noted art critic and his works have been cited by prominent authors from across the world. His works have been published in many magazines and academic journals in India and abroad. He has been conferred the Kerala Puraskar Award in the year 2007 by Kerala Lalithakala Akademi and has been the senior fellow of Nehru Memorial Museum & Library. His article is being rejected several times and the editors seem to not understand the value of the awards and contribution made by R Nandakumar. Is there any way I could improve the article?

Thank you.

Tirutirutiru (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , as a tertiary source, we only cover what reliable, secondary sources have already established as noteworthy. If the awards and citations mentioned are truly prominent, then they will be covered in such sources, and all you need to do is cite the coverage that says so. You'll need to remove the unreliable/blog sources, remove all unsourced statements and almost all of the primary sourcing (see when it's appropriate to use a self-published source), and put the punctuation inside the footnotes. Also, if you have an affiliation with the subject, our Conflict of interest guidelines ask that you declare this on the article's talk page. czar  18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, you can't really be sure of coverage in regional Indian cases, or at least ones you can find on the web, since there is so much less online there. It's a problem. Johnbod (talk) 03:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of reference/index works for topic areas that have mostly offline or non-current coverage. Bibliography problems precede systemic bias in WP notability czar  04:44, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, really? Could you name some of the "plenty of reference/index works" that might be applicable in this case? Johnbod (talk) 18:32, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Depends on the topic and language. You can start by asking an art librarian at one of his institutions. czar  21:32, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Johnbod Johnbod (talk), Thanks a lot. Yes, the challenge is because there is very little online coverage - I do not have any conflict of interest, as I do not know him personally but have read about his contribution in many printed books, local magazines and newspapers - and got access to his full bio from a library in my area. Yes, will make changes as you had suggested. Regards Tiru Tiru Tiru Tirutirutiru (talk) 04:24, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Old_Master
To capitalize, or not.... Johnbod (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

American woodblock printmakers
Hello,

I created the template American woodblock printers.
 * Are there any other noted instructors than Arthur Wesley Dow or William S. Rice that taught woodblock printmaking in the U.S.?
 * Any other suggestions or additions to the template are also appreciated. For instance, I have thought of having a group for people that went to Japan and studied woodblock printmaking. — CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 21:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Struck out part that is done.— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 01:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

New York Metropolitan releases 375,000 images
See Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions and the news story linked there. Really, this is mainly of interest for the 3-D objects, as we have always been able to upload flat things to Commons (under Bridgeman-Corel). At the moment they aren't yet on Commons, but hopefully someone like User:Fae (who did the wonderful LACMA ones), will do a mass upload. The metadata on the actual MMA site is better, someone says. Johnbod (talk) 17:32, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

RM at Talk:Red Cross with Triptych egg
The RM discussion at Talk:Red Cross with Triptych egg is ongoing and relisted. I invite you to discussion. --George Ho (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Missing female art historians
There's a discussion here, and a list of such with bios on other-language WPs at WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Art historians (compiled via Wikidata - mostly local heroines). Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Notice about adminship to participants at this project
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:


 * Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:40, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Fearless Girl
To commemorate International Women's Day, I invite project members to help expand the newly-created article, Fearless Girl. Happy editing! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:17, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, here's a quick Wiidata item for you: . Wittylama 17:04, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Dominique Stroobant
In Draft:Dominique Stroobant I am creating the article about Belgian photographer Dominique Stroobant. He is both a sculptor and a photograph.

If anyone has any useful source to use, that would be nice. I can only use online website... and I live in China where there is no google. I have enough information to prove his notability, especially the fact that he is cited on newspapers and blogs of other artists in many European countries, but clearly without better professional sources it will look a little unbalanced.

I am doing it because I know someone in his family and if I can finish it (even as a simple stub) before his birthday (as a surprise), we have more chances he will be pleased and get some nice pictures for commons. --Alexmar983 (talk) 16:17, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Ongoing RM at Talk:National Emblem of the People's Republic of China
An RM at Talk:National Emblem of the People's Republic of China was relisted and is ongoing. I invite you to comment there. --George Ho (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Foreigner - Agent Provocateur.JPG
This image, File:Foreigner - Agent Provocateur.JPG, is under discussion at, where I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 10:08, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

New book: Asking the Audience: Participatory Art in 1980s New York
Adair Rounthwaite, Asking the Audience: Participatory Art in 1980s New York, University of Minnesota Press, 2017. Maybe interesting for Participatory art and Martha Rosler (also covers Group Material's Democracy). Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 16:08, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red: paintings
The Women in Red WikiProject is a project dedicated to turning redlinks into blue ones within the project scope of women's biographies and works by women. A subgroup is focused on paintings. An editor has created a list here. I wanted to connect the two groups as there is some crossover with this subgroup and I believe there are some significant opportunities to create some much-needed articles on art-related topics. Take a look at this list or visit the group's page. Often the talk page lists articles in need of work and up for deletion, and at times they are often visual art topics. Thanks.  freshacconci  (✉) 16:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmmm! I'm not sure how many of these are "much-needed". There are already 11 Artemisia Gentileschi paintings with articles, and 14 Judith Leysters (she doesn't appear on the list, perhaps for this reason).  These numbers are a good deal higher than for male contemporaries of equal or greater importance. If people want to create more, then fine (though more than 2 lines please), but let's not kid ourselves that there is an imbalance that needs addressing. Johnbod (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, hmmm indeed. I was pretty puzzled by the selection, but it appears to be created based on a query that filters for paintings by women with Wikipedia sitelinks from Wikidata that do not have sitelinks on the English Wikipedia. Arguably the English Wikipedia has the most articles about paintings (by men and women) than any other project, so this list is a bit short. Also, the overwhelming majority of paintings by both men and women are still not in Wikidata. There are lots of great paintings on Commons too that aren't in Wikidata yet, so the "best and the brightest" might be available for article writers on Commons, if they are so inclined. Though most women painters were born too late for us to be able to host images of their paintings copyright free, there are still lots of potential paintings available to choose from. So I think it's a worthwhile project, but the list is a bit disappointing. Jane (talk) 19:38, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Horrible article needs eyes
Item Idem has languished for over two years after my attempt to clean it up was reverted by someone clearly with a connection to the subject. I forgot all about it all until I saw that this editor added even more ELs. The article was basically a cv made of ELs. I've restored it to a stub with a BLP template, as there are few sources at this point. I'm sure the editor will be back and try to revert -- the language they use in an old message to me is the they ("we") apparently represent the artist and there are implied ownership issues. I'm not even certain if the person is notable, but more eyes on it would be appreciated.  freshacconci  (✉) 02:28, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


 * From what I can see, the EL's were links to online coverage about Item Idem/Cyril Duval. They were sources. It's unconstructive to keep removing them, they essentially help prove his notability. I'm inclined to add them back and place a "lacks inline citations" template on the article. It's not as if Wikipedia has a surfeit of articles about non-English language artists and designers. Sionk (talk) 10:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


 * This version has the craziest link farm that I've ever seen, but I agree that there are sources there that establish notability. Rather than a link farm, I think that these should be formatted like sources for further reading, picking out the best examples - i.e., where there is more than just a mention, exclude blogs. So that what is left are the most useful sources for building the article. I am happy to work on that as a starting point.–CaroleHenson (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


 * His notability appears inadequate against WP:CREATIVE (many articles would fail this test). There is no biography on French Wikipedia, and no article on the Great Indoors Awards. However, the coverage in some of the links may qualify him under WP:BASIC. Ideally someone should check more dependable of the sources, and either add some content or nominate for deletion. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:35, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Bust of Cristiano Ronaldo
I invite editors to assist with expanding the article about the recently unveiled Bust of Cristiano Ronaldo. There are additional sources shared on the article's talk page. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:54, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅: Draft:Bust of Cristiano Ronaldo. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:44, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

need help at School of Paris
Hi, could use some opinions and comment at Talk:School of Paris. An ability to read and understand fr:École de Paris may help, but your expert Art knowledge and/or access to good, offline resources is probably more important. Thanks in advance, Mathglot (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Jackson Pollock and Fractal Expressionism
I'm not sure who's been paying attention to this but we have the standalone article on "fractal expressionism" and a paragraph on the topic written in a more general way in the main Pollock article here. This is way outside my area of knowledge but there are one or two editors (or the same editor using two accounts) continuously editing both and I'm not convinced it's for the better. I PRODed the fractal article but it was disputed so I left it as is. Another editor has (I believe reasonably) added tags asking for expert help and suggesting that the article is too technical. One of the two fractal editors removed the templates by merely stating that anyone could understand the article. I may be thick, granted, and when it comes to math I'm very much in the average, as in that article is too technical for the average reader. Needless to say I'm not touching it but as it stands it's far too much an essay as well. Has anyone put any thought into this? Yes, this fractal theory is a real thing and has had at least a limited reaction within academia. Is it too WP:DUE for the Pollock article? Is the fractal article a valid topic and if so who is going to edit it to something usable for an encyclopedia? We've all seen sub-par articles languish untouched for years, useful only to the one or two editors who putter around. My main concern is this: the editors in question can be somewhat disruptive and since there's a paragraph in the main Pollock article it impacts on the overall project. Thoughts?  freshacconci  (✉) 18:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed removal of non-free Matisse paintings from main Matisse article
See here:

Evidently there's some criticism of their being used in galleries in the main article on Matisse. Not sure why this guy chose to discuss it there rather than on Talk:Henri Matisse, but whatever.

If someone with more time and energy for this kind of thing would like to give a defense for these images and their use in the main article, please do.  Litho  derm  23:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion re: best name for subcategories in Category:Confederate States of America monuments and memorials
Project members are invited to participate in this discussion re: the naming of subcategories in Category:Confederate States of America monuments and memorials. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Importance level
Hey there, please rate the article Pregnancy in art on its importance level whether its high, medium, low. It is currently blank. 31.215.192.38 (talk) 17:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't think we assigned importance ratings to articles for this wikiproject. But I could be wrong. Mduvekot (talk) 17:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Although there's a section for importance level when in edit mode, it doesn't appear in the actual template, just the quality rating. I've never been sure why.  freshacconci  (✉) 20:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Museum reception
I had started a Reception section on National Museum of African Art to house some of the critical response to the museum's programming, but I'm not quite sure what to do with it. On one hand, I could expand it with reviews of major exhibitions, but on the other, I haven't seen another museum article to have a similar section. It also might be out of scope/weight for the article. Open to feedback, especially if you want to respond on the talk page (please ping me if you respond here). Also interested in ideas for expanding the Outreach section—sources have been bare, though, unless you know of a better place to look czar  18:11, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hyperrealism (visual arts) and Photorealism
Are these really two different things? The artists are the same, and none of the articles makes clear what the relation is. Should they be merged?--Ymblanter (talk) 16:54, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Not sure. Hyperrealism (visual arts) doesn't need a photo, & much of it is sculpture. Johnbod (talk) 16:58, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I am just coming back from a high-profile exhibition in Rotterdam, . This is exclusively painting, and I believe all of them used photo.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:01, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That article indicates that the terms photorealism and hyperrealism are used interchangeably.
 * "Hyperrealism - also known as photorealism - dates back to the late 1960s in America and evolved in response to the dominant trend of abstraction, minimalistic and conceptual art at the time"
 * "The overview of almost 50 years of hyperrealism illustrates not only how the subject choice has changed, but also how the technology with which photorealists produce their work has changed: they first transformed images from celluloid into oil paint, and nowadays from digital pixels to acrylic paint."
 * Perhaps the two articles (Hyperrealism (visual arts) and Photorealism) should be merged. Bus stop (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Greatest Painting in Britain Vote
Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at Greatest Painting in Britain Vote? It's not clear how this is notable enough for a stand-alone article per WP:SAL. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:53, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's ok myself - the owning museums sometimes refer to it. There was a deal of publicity at the time. Johnbod (talk) 08:21, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Topos V


The article Topos V has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable artwork

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mathglot (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Now un-prodded. Johnbod (talk) 00:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

RfC
There is a discussion about the article Don Reitz at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard. Please voice your opinion. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 03:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of. We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
 * The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
 * The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
 * The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to for his original, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Another set of painter/sculptor templates from the Wikimedia list
I have also gone through the list of painters and sculptors at Wikimedia's list of 10,000 essential articles for all wikipedias. The following biographical subjects on en WP of high importance to the wikimedia movement seem to have an insufficient number of articles for their works on en WP to create a navbox: Andrei Rublev, Karl Friedrich Schinkel, Victor Vasarely, and Raja Ravi Varma. However, I was able to create the following templates: Grant Wood, Gustav Klimt, Jusepe de Ribera, Canaletto, Andrea del Sarto, Kazimir Malevich, Nicholas Roerich, and Phidias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 05:42, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Heather Horton
Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at Heather Horton and re-assessing it? The article's content is not supported by any citations to reliable sources and much of it looks like a CV for the artist. It's been tagged with Notability since 2010 and it's not clear whether this person meets WP:BIO or WP:ARTIST. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:04, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It does look like a bit like autobio/CV, but the creator of the article doesn't look like Horton herself, unless she's really into Christian Rock the subject that seems to care about most. The first potential source I could quickly find is this forbes article, which is not sufficient to establish notability. Loch doesn't list her as an artist, but does represent some other artists who have articles, like Roberta Bondar, David Thauberger and Lawrence Paul Yuxweluptun. The only other artist Abrozzo were involved with appears to be Stella Michaels. I don't see any evidence of COI editing, I think its possible that article is a genuine (if misguided) effort by a well-intended editor. I don't think the article would survive an AfD. Mduvekot (talk) 13:12, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look . added some maintenance templates and also posted something about the article at User talk:Marchjuly. I did try to do a little WP:BEFORE, but did not find very much. I wasn't too concerned about it being an autobio, but rather that it has been without sourcing for so long. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:43, 7 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Heather Horton does not meet the WP:ARTIST guidelines (only one of which need be met):
 * 1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * A web search suggests not.
 * 2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
 * Images of her work suggest not.
 * 3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * May well have a significant body of work, but I have found no substantial independent coverage.
 * 4 The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
 * (a) No. (b) No evidence in the article. (c) I have failed to find reviews of her work in major newspapers or art journals. (d) Insufficient inclusion in major collections. There is a painting in the Government of Ontario Art Collection. Not listed on the website of the National Gallery of Canada or of the Art Gallery of Ontario.


 * There does not appear to be any other reason why she would meet the WP:BIO criteria.


 * I am unfamiliar with the Toronto Art scene and do not know how prestigious the Abbozzo and Loch Galleries are. I have added an archive link for the Loch Gallery where she was represented in 2009. However, her representation by these galleries and the Forbes article found by Mduvekot indicate that she is a well-established professional artist.


 * Election to the three arts organisations mentioned in the article is insufficient. They have a lower profile than the British Royal Academy, for example.


 * In my view the WP:ARTIST guidelines are too exacting. I have encountered numerous articles that do not meet them, most of which I have not challenged. However I would judge the notability here to be a marginal fail.


 * The article is inadequate in terms of useful content and sourcing. This is probably a reflection of the lack of coverage in independent sources.


 * I agree that the article was probably not written by Horton, but it could be by a friend or a family member. It is not promotional and is neutral in tone. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:20, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for very detailed analysis and sorry for not responding sooner. FWIW, I pretty much agree with everything you wrote. I haven't been able to find any better sourcing since I first posted here. While it's clear that Horton exists and is an artist, I'm still not sure she is a Wikipedia-notable artist. Maybe taking this to AfD is warranted? -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Following WP:BEFORE, a normal Google search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search did not uncover any new sources. However, a Google books search found the following publications which seem likely to be by this Heather Horton:
 * The first two are catalogues of her exhibitions and in the others she is listed as the fifth of seven authors (if it is her). This is insufficient for notabilty as an author. These publications might contain some biographical or critical information, but this is unlikely contribute significantly to her notability. The exhibition catalogues would not be independent sources. I favour ''Articles for deletion. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I have tried to help the Heather Horton article by making an edit or two, adding its only reference and a reflist. The article is really a curriculum vitae. I agree there are notabllity issues. --Eagledj (talk) 13:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The first two are catalogues of her exhibitions and in the others she is listed as the fifth of seven authors (if it is her). This is insufficient for notabilty as an author. These publications might contain some biographical or critical information, but this is unlikely contribute significantly to her notability. The exhibition catalogues would not be independent sources. I favour ''Articles for deletion. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I have tried to help the Heather Horton article by making an edit or two, adding its only reference and a reflist. The article is really a curriculum vitae. I agree there are notabllity issues. --Eagledj (talk) 13:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The first two are catalogues of her exhibitions and in the others she is listed as the fifth of seven authors (if it is her). This is insufficient for notabilty as an author. These publications might contain some biographical or critical information, but this is unlikely contribute significantly to her notability. The exhibition catalogues would not be independent sources. I favour ''Articles for deletion. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I have tried to help the Heather Horton article by making an edit or two, adding its only reference and a reflist. The article is really a curriculum vitae. I agree there are notabllity issues. --Eagledj (talk) 13:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review: Bust of Cristiano Ronaldo
I have submitted a request to have the article's deletion overturned. I invite editors to review Draft:Bust of Cristiano Ronaldo, then share their thoughts at Deletion review/Log/2017 June 22. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:49, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Packed galleries
An editor has told me that the "packed" image gallery mode should not be used on Wikiproject:Visual Arts pages? I can't seem to find the discussion about this, could someone please explain why—I can't really imagine what the reason for this could be. Seraphim System ( talk ) 00:27, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The reason is they ram images together without giving them space to breathe, and don't allow them to be seen properly. No doubt someone will remember where the lengthy discussion was - it was taken off to a sub-page of some French 19th-century subject, as I remember. Johnbod (talk) 00:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, that sounds entirely subjective, personally I think the image borders are really ugly. Is there really some longstanding community consensus on this? I would like an answer from someone other then the editor who is edit warring over this on the Longquan Celadon article. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 00:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Ah, here we are. Johnbod (talk) 00:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah I agree the standard looks better for that particular gallery and it's one of the few exceptions I've seen. The issue is it looks bad on the Longquan Celadon article. Also, you said it was a WP:VA guideline, you did not mention that it was an RfC about a specific gallery for an entirely unrelated article. I guess we can have our own RfC. I just didn't want to waste community time if there actually was some kind of long-established overwhelming consensus. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 00:59, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Start another rfc if you like, but please don't edit-war over it. The Rfc was clearly intended to apply to other art articles. Johnbod (talk) 01:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, it looks like it was closed no consensus despite many votes to switch to packed mode. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 01:19, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It was closed in the usual way by no less a figure than User:Slim Virgin, with a longish closing note ending "....but for now consensus to change to packed mode has not been established." Johnbod (talk) 03:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


 * The editor has now opened another RFC at Talk:Longquan_celadon. People may care to coomment on the section before that also. Johnbod (talk) 03:26, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Request for reassessment: A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte
I request a reassessment of A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte; I think that in the years since its last assessment it's gotten past Start-class. Sumana Harihareswara 17:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Undoubtedly above Start-class. I have promoted it to C, but it may even be B. Also raised to mid-importance - it is a landmark in the history of art and may even be "high". Other opinions requested. Pelarmian (talk) 08:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We don't do importance for VA. I thought it C but no higher, given the importance of the work. Johnbod (talk) 13:36, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Sumana Harihareswara 15:08, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Nancy Crow
Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at Nancy Crow? Almost all of the sources cited are WP:BLPSELFPUB so it's not clear whether Crow meets WP:BIO or WP:ARTIST; moreover, the article is a bit promotional sounding, particularly the box quote at the beginning, and makes mention of a number of non-Wikipedia notable collections and exhibitions. Quilting might not get the type of coverage of some other fine arts, so I'd figured it would be best to get feedback from others before adding tags, etc. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I am more concerned with sourcing than notability. She would probably meet WP:ARTIST if sources were added to confirm that her works are in the permanent collections of the American Folk Art Museum and the American Craft Museum (now the Museum of Arts and Design) (The person's work (or works) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.) I rapidly found the following good sources:
 * Verbcatcher (talk) 23:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking on this . I only mentioned "notability" because pretty much all of the sources are Crow's books. This may be fine for referencing certain content, but it doesn't help establishing notability. Anyway, I'm glad I asked about the article at some WikiProjects for feedback since it seems some others have started helping to improve the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Verbcatcher (talk) 23:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking on this . I only mentioned "notability" because pretty much all of the sources are Crow's books. This may be fine for referencing certain content, but it doesn't help establishing notability. Anyway, I'm glad I asked about the article at some WikiProjects for feedback since it seems some others have started helping to improve the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking on this . I only mentioned "notability" because pretty much all of the sources are Crow's books. This may be fine for referencing certain content, but it doesn't help establishing notability. Anyway, I'm glad I asked about the article at some WikiProjects for feedback since it seems some others have started helping to improve the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Legitimate edits were rejected/deleted on BIOART page - Request for Assessment - or am I doing something wrong?
Hi Im new to Wikipedia. I joined to try to add information to the BioArt page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioArt

The article states "Although BioArtists work with living matter, there is some debate as to the stages at which matter can be considered to be alive or living. Creating living beings and practicing in the life sciences brings about ethical, social, and aesthetic inquiry. "

I added an example: " Consider "Regenerative Reliquary", 2016 by Amy Karle, a sculpture consisting of 3D printed scaffolds for human stem cell growth into bone installed in a bioreactor[2]. The cells and genetic material come from a live human donor, are expanded in a lab, grow into tissue and mineralize into bone along that scaffold. The cells continue to live on separately from the body they came from, and may continue to live on after that person dies, raising interesting questions about what is considered to be "life" and "alive"."

I linked to "Regenerative Reliquary" and cited a source from PopSci. There are other sources I can cite as well. I added a picture.

I also added Amy Karle's name under BioArt practicioner. She is a popular emerging artist in the field and has been widely recogonized as an artist working within in the scientific, medical and technological community. She shows regularily alongside other artists mentioned in the article.

I am wondering why this is being rejected? Am I doing something wrong? Please advise.

Best, Laughing Albartross --LaughingAlbatross (talk) 22:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

ps apologies if this is not the corect way to post this request! I posted in talk and was invited to teahouse, still not sure how to post subjects here. THANK YOU!

Sources:

www.amykarle.com

Bringing Bones to Life https://vimeo.com/168270199

3DHeals “3DHEALS Influencer Interview Series: Amy Karle” 22 March 2017 http://3d-heals.com/3dheals-influencer-interview-series-amy-karle/

Dutch Daily de Volkskrant “Een hand die in een pot groeit, en het is kunst” 18 March 2017 http://www.volkskrant.nl/wetenschap/een-hand-die-in-een-pot-groeit-en-het-is-kunst~a4475717/

All3DP Amy Karle named one of the “35 Most Influential Women in 3D Printing” 8 March 2017 https://all3dp.com/20-influential-women-3d-printing/

AFI Magazine “SCIENCE, ART & FASHION: Meet Amy Karle, an artist and designer who uses the mind, body, science and technology to create art” 17 February 2017 https://issuu.com/afimagazine/docs/afi_vol_1_issue_3/56

3D Printing Media Network “Bioartist Amy Karle is Creating a 3D BioPrinted Hand” 9 February 2017 https://www.3dprintingbusiness.directory/news/bioartist-amy-karle-creating-full-bioprinted-hand-real-skin/

Scientific American (Taiwanese Edition Magazine) “Science and Art” February 2017

Futurism “This hand was 3D printed... and is made from human cells” 6 January 2017

https://www.facebook.com/futurism/videos/686581234854412/ also at “This 3D Printed Art Project Could Have Medical Applications” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmz5MFanjfE

NowThis Future “This Artist is Growing a Human Hand” 31 Dec 2016 https://www.facebook.com/NowThisFuture/videos/1382203345154175/ (547K Views and 1215 shares as of July 1 2017) Daily Planet / Discovery Channel Amy Karle’s work featured in “The Year in SciTech Special: Discovery Science Worldwide” Dec 2016

Daily Planet Discovery Specials segment featuring Amy Karle’s work “Bringing Bones To Life” 21 October 2016

Tech Alert “An artist is growing a genuine skeletal human hand a lab” 18 October 2016 http://thetechalert.net/artist-growing-genuine-skeletal-hand-lab/

Digital Trends “Forget Impressionism, This Artist is Growing a Real Skeleton Human Hand in a Lab” 14 October 2016 https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/3d-printed-hand-lab/

Popular Science “An Artist Is Growing A Skeleton Human Hand In A Lab” 12 October 2016 http://www.popsci.com/lab-grown-bones-on-display

Biotech Archives - Magpie Aesthetic “Amy Karle’s Regenerative Reliquary – A 3D Printed Bone Growth Scaffold as Sculpture” 8 October 2016 https://magpieaesthetic.com/amy-karles-regenerative-reliquary-3d-printed-bone-growth-scaffold-sculpture/

Art :: Future “Future Factories: Experimenting at the Edges of the Next Industrial Revolution” http://artfuture.com/?s=amy+karle 12 September 2016

3D Print “3D Printed Scaffold for Artistic Cell Culture” 30 August 2016 https://3dprint.com/147378/3d-printed-cell-culture-scaffold/

Materia “Regenerative Reliquary: Bringing Bones To Life” 12 August 2016 http://materia.nl/article/regenerative-reliquary-bringing-bones-life/

ID Ideas Diseno Industrial “Relicario Regenerativo” 6 August 2016 https://ideasdi.com/relicario-regenerativo/

Design Indaba “Bringing bones to life: Artist prototypes a hand grown out of stem cells” 26 July 2016 http://www.designindaba.com/articles/creative-work/bringing-bones-life-artist-prototypes-hand-grown-out-stem-cells

Just Add Sharks “Laser Cut Garments” 19 July 2016 http://justaddsharks.co.uk/blogs/2016-07-19/laser-cut-garments

Techly “This artist has a bone to pick, and it’s not what you’d expect”. 15 July 2016 https://www.techly.com.au/2016/07/16/artist-bone-pick-not-youd-expect/

AdaFruit “Biohacking The Body To 3D-Print Fantastical Human Bones” 12 July 2016 https://blog.adafruit.com/2016/07/12/biohacking-the-body-to-3d-print-fantastical-human-bones/

Engineering.com “The Best and Most Unique 3D Printer Materials: Photopolymer Edition” and

“DIY 3D Printing Resins and the Future of Photopolymers” 12 July 2016 http://www.engineering.com/3DPrinting/3DPrintingArticles/ArticleID/12625/The-Best-and-Most-Unique-3D-Printer-Materials-Photopolymer-Edition.aspx Museum of Bio “Regenerative Reliquary by Amy Karle” 10 July 2016 https://museum-of-bio.tumblr.com/page/2

Fast Company “This Artist is Biohacking the Body To 3D Print Fantastical Human Bones” 6 July 2016 https://www.fastcompany.com/3060592/this-artist-is-biohacking-the-body-to-3-d-print-fantastical-human-bones

Inspiring Mathematics and Science in Teacher Education “Amy Karle: Bringing Bones to Life” 28 June 2016 http://www.imsite.edu.au/p/resources.html

Opensource.com “Artist grows real human hand; inspired by work in open source” 18 June 2016 https://opensource.com/life/16/6/weekly-news-june-18

The Creators Project / Vice Magazine “An Artist is Growing a Real Human Hand” 14 June 2016 http://thecreatorsproject.vice.com/blog/artist-grows-human-hand-autodesk-laboratory

Vocativ “BioArtist Grows a Sculpture out of Bone” 13 June 2016 http://www.vocativ.com/328749/bioartist-grows-a-sculpture-out-of-bone/

Bloge “This Artist IS USING 3D Printing Support and Stem Cells to Grow A Human Hand” 2 June 2016 http://bloge.us/the-artist-is-using-3d-printing-support-and-stem-cells-to-grow-a-human-hand/

Prosthetic Knowledge “Bringing Bones To Life” 1 June 2016 http://prostheticknowledge.tumblr.com/post/145274078716/bringing-bones-to-life-art-project-by-amy-karle

3P 3printr “Artist Amy Karle Makes Instructable Manual For A Hand 3D Printed With Stem Cells” 30 May 2016 https://www.3printr.com/artist-amy-karle-makes-instructable-manual-hand-3d-printed-stem-cells-3839527/

Spectrum News “Tissue Tussle” 27 May 2016 https://spectrumnews.org/news/spotted/tissue-tussle-adult-inattention-printed-hand/

3D Everyday “Artist Growing Human Hand with 3D Printed Scaffolds and Stem Cells” 26 May 2016 http://www.3deveryday.com/news5210.html

GBEMTI Genomics, Biotech and Emerging Medical Technology “An Artist Is Growing a Hand Out Of Human Stem Cells” 26 May 2016 http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/gbemti/GBEMTI052616.php

Med Media “American Artist Raises Her Hand For Stem Cells” 26 May 2016 http://medportal.ru/mednovosti/news/2016/05/26/886arm/

3D Print Plan “An artist is growing a hand out of human stem cells” 25 May 2016 http://www.3dprintplan.com/2016/05/25/an-artist-is-growing-a-hand-out-of-human-stem-cells-2/

3ders “Artist Amy Karle is Growing a Human Hand with 3D Printed Scaffolds and Stem Cells” 25 May, 2016 http://www.3ders.org/articles/20160525-artist-amy-karle-is-growing-a-human-hand-with-3d-printed-scaffolds-and-stem-cells.html

All3DP All About 3D Printing “3D Printed Hand Trellis: Artist Goes Out on a Limb” 25 May 2016 https://all3dp.com/3d-printed-hand-trellis/

Ars Technica “An artist is prototyping a hand grown out of human stem cells” 24 May 2016 https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/an-artist-is-growing-a-hand-out-of-human-stem-cells/


 * To be brutally honest, I agree with Freshacconci's reversion of your edits. The purpose of Wikipedia is to write in a factual, balanced way about subjects. Your edits seem to be motivated entirely to promote Amy Karle. If Karle is a notable artist I suggest the best route is to write a Wikipedia article about her before adding her to any lists. At the very least, if you're adding her to a list, you need to demonstrate she is a widely known 'bioartist' by adding some serious, non-blog sources about her work. Sionk (talk) 23:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

AfD: Benito Juárez (Martinez)
Project members are invited to contribute to the ongoing AfD discussion re: the Benito Juárez (Martinez) article here: Articles for deletion/Benito Juárez (Martinez). Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Edith Baumann
Hello arts experts. The draft linked above has a number of references. Is this a notable artist, and if so is the draft ready to be moved to mainspace?&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 04:28, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. I see some critical assessment of her work, even if the LA Times' Leah Ollman thought her paintings "add little to this genre". For me, the article is a bit tainted by the conflict of interest of its creator, who appears to be her gallerist. I really dislike the indiscriminate list of exhibitions, which appears to be an outdated copy of the list on her own website. There isn't much content. "Baumann's work has been featured in many solo and group exhibitions." should be removed as meaningless peacockery. The statement "Her most recent, are raw pigment acrylic paintings on canvas." is either outdated or plain wrong, cited to an article from 1987, although a quick search showed that she does appear to have been making raw pigment paintings around 2014. I don't see the point of mentioning that she was interviewed and then citing that interview as a source for the statement. If that were removed too, very little would remain. Perhaps someone at WP:WikiProject Women artists wants to attempt to expand and improve it? Mduvekot (talk) 11:27, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Bernard Moore (potter)
This important British art potter needs an entry. Pelarmian (talk) 08:24, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. There are 22 of his works in the Victoria and Albert Museum and six in the British Museum. Please create an article, here are a few sources to get you started:
 * (self-published source)
 * (self-published source)
 * Verbcatcher (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * (self-published source)
 * (self-published source)
 * Verbcatcher (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * (self-published source)
 * Verbcatcher (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Started Bernard Moore (potter), but still a stub. Pelarmian (talk) 12:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Samuel Rush Condon
Please take a look at Samuel Rush Condon. I am concerned about notability (WP:BIO and WP:ARTIST), and whether the article is over-promotional. There have been several edits by User:Samuelrushcondon, about which I have added a note at User talk:Samuelrushcondon. There is a related discussion at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * That article is very promotional, which is not surprising as it's difficult to write about an artist of questionable notability without padding it a bit with fluffery. He's twice been a finalist for the Archibald Prize which that article tells us is a major portraiture prize in Australia (any Aussies out there?). But as he's a finalist that may be insufficient. Otherwise, the article probably doesn't pass WP:GNG; with a major clean up of promotional language, we may not be left with much and the sources are minimal at best.  freshacconci  (✉) 03:07, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Archibald Prize is highly significant in the art scene and the subject of popular media coverage every year here. The talk/buzz is typically centred around the individuals (typically celebrities) who are depicted in the portraits, less the artists, and once the winner is announced, the media buzz typically focuses on them until it dies down. In 2015 the most recent year Condon appeared as a finalist, there were 46 other finalists as well: List of Archibald Prize 2015 finalists. From a handful of the blue-linked individual artists on that list that I looked at (most have no articles), most had work in permanent collections or some other significance in their public life. That is something that Condon appears to lack, work in permanent collections or significant exhibitions, and WP:ARTIST suggests that is one way in which notability is established. seb26 (talk) 01:09, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

I nominated this for deletion at Articles for deletion/Samuel Rush Condon. Any comments appreciated. seb26 (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

James Joseph DeMartis
Would someone mind taking a look at James Joseph DeMartis and assessing it? It's newly created and was not submitted via WP:AFC so it might need some cleaning up assuming the subject meets WP:ARTIST or WP:BIO. At first glance, the "Exhibitions" section seems like it might be an attempt to mention everything per WP:NOTEVERYTHING instead of just focusing on the the more notable ones. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:42, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. Can someone help me? I noticed the images in this page I created have suddenly disappeared. The four examples of artwork selected were there to illustrate change in the artist's work over the course of four separate decades. I can limit the number of exhibitions by eliminating some if necessary, but the images belong in the article. Thanks for your help. Leezk (talk) 04:36, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, I haven't had a chance to review the article myself, but I'm guessing the removal of images was a fair use issue. The guidelines are here but since he died in 1996, the work is still under copyright. Wikipedia tends to be very strict with non-free images (too strict, IMO). Copyrighted images need to be limited (usually just one) and need to be addressed in the article directly. Each image used also has to have a fair use rationale attached to the original file. For all of us editors working in visual arts, it's a huge problem. We find it difficult to add images without someone removing them -- even when a fair use rationale is included and the image is discussed in the article. I don't say this to discourage you -- even Picasso's works are copyrighted and it's difficult to add images to that article. Which is ridiculous. Work on getting one image for the article, one you think is a good representation of his work. Make sure it's mentioned in the article and that the mention is referenced (it can't just be our opinion that the work is significant. A published critical analysis is necessary). Since he died relatively recently by Wikipedia standards, it may be difficult to create a gallery of images. If there is a decent website with his work (preferably an offi ial site run by his estate or dealer), make sure that's included in the infobox so readers can see his work. Hope this helps.  freshacconci  (✉)  13:18, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Painting (1946) or Painting (Bacon 1946)
The titling options/possibilities are: all italics, thus treating "(1946)" as part of the title or italics for "Painting", with an extended qualifier which includes the artist's surname. The discussion is at Talk:Painting (1946). &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 07:30, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Karol Vail
Please note that someone started an article about the new Director of the Peggy Guggenheim Collection, who is also Peggy Guggenheim's granddaughter (Solomon R. Guggenheim's great granddaughter), Karole Vail. You can contribute to the discussion here: Articles for deletion/Karol Vail. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:38, 31 July 2017 (UTC)