Ayesha23

Remarks about the use of images on Wikipedia of works by contemporary artists.

Until quite recently there were a multitude of magazines that covered the visual arts. All that has changed with the advent of the internet. Even the sale catalogues of the major auction houses are likely to be superseded soon by e-versions. Numbers of emerging artists now illustrate their works on personal websites, indeed a number of them such as Parker Ito style themselves as internet artists.

It should be possible to illustrate their work in Wikipedia. Fair Use criteria explicitly include works of art (including sculptures). A 0.1 MP file should be acceptable as should be high resolution images of details of the work (limited to say 5% of the total work). There should be no hard and fast rules about the number of such files allowed. Sufficent images should be allowed to record the various phases and facets of the artist's work. In the case of 3-D artwork the photographer (if not the artists themselves) has rights as well and should have released the file as free to share.

For an example of what is allowed see Kour Pour (an article start by me).

Editors wishing help and guidance about the process are welcome to contact me here. Ayesha23 (talk) 11:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Ayesha23, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

van der Weyden

Hi, saying hello. Very good work here; you can really write. Its great to see an article on The Justice of Trajan and Herkinbald finally. Ceoil (talk) 22:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Cheers Ceoil. I much liked your edit on the Standing Madonna. Only here for a few days more :(. Back next year maybe... I want to get the Chroniques de Hainaut miniature in, as well as the embroidery I scanned and uploaded to Commons from the expensive Campbell & Van der Stock I scanned the Justice from.

Kind regards Ayesha23 (talk) 22:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Leaving so soon? We hardly knew you! Shame. Hey if you ever have the inclination Portrait of Antoine, 'Grand Bâtard' of Burgundy might be worth expanding; might make a nice DKY main page thing some time. Anyway the Pietà is really sorryful and beautiful; might be worth mentioning the link to the The Descent from the Cross, what with Christ's body being shaped as a bow and all that. Ceoil (talk) 22:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I have to. Complicated thing, but I should be able to look in on a reasonably regular basis. You'll probably recognise me ;). I would like to add to Descent from the Cross (I think I have a better image, will check). Not an Early Netherlandish expert by any means BTW. Just sonehow found myself there. Van Eyck's Madonna in the Church I've been looking at so excellent. I do so love Wikipedia. Ayesha23 (talk) 22:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

A writer of your quality will always have a place; long as you behave ;) Ceoil (talk) 22:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I took the infobox out of Virgin and Child Enthroned (van der Weyden). It was pushing too far down into the article body and squashing both the text and other images. I've retained the info it had, but needs must. Ceoil (talk) 20:20, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

That's fine, do whatever's best. I'm just about to upload a start on Rogier's treatment of the Cambrai Madonna. Tomorrow I'll do a couple of quick stubs on the Hainhout miniature and the embroidery I mentioned and then I'm afraid I'm away off on my travels :). Do you know the Campbell and van det Stock book I've been mainly using? It's really beautiful. Almost everthing in it is notable and worth recording. Ayesha23 (talk) 20:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok,thanks. No I dont; but have tried but its been out of print for a few years. I still like to get books from book stores and they havnt been able to source it. Ceoil (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Two small stubs took most of my day. Done here now. Off burrowing :). Back next year maybe, but I don't expect to return to van der Weyden. Thank you for your courtesy. Great article on Early Netherlandish. Ayesha23 (talk) 20:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I enjoyed our work together, when you do come back say hello. I hope your "trip" goes ok. Best from me. Ceoil (talk) 21:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Virgin and Child Enthroned (van der Weyden)

Gatoclass (talk) 08:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for this! Just passing through :) ...

February 2014

Please do not attack other editors, as you did on WP:NFCR. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 09:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Not a personal attack at all. Go away. I shall delete your further contributions here without comment. Ayesha23 (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Not unless I delete them first. Ceoil (talk) 18:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Really? "Get a life", and "you should get out more" are not personal attacks? Bollocks. Both of you are capable of better than that. Either of you can delete this now. Black Kite (talk) 19:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Try us. Al least mysellf and Ayesha are invested in our subject areas, while you are just some passing guideline spuoting, whatever. I'd prefer to be ruled by enthusism than by untested and unlikely rulz. You want to weild a sword is my impression, but why you want to do so I dont think you know why. Maybe just to pass the time; its you hobby. Ceoil (talk) 21:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Cheers Ceoil. Thank you for support. I might be off on a trip to jolly old Copenhagen soon BTW ;

Black Kite, I see you're administrator. I would have replied more stentoriously if I had known, I thought you were one of this group at WP:NFCR. You should know better than to pull out the tired old "personal attack" accusation, busybodying yourself like this. It's just a robust exchange of views, and they started it. If that's what constitutes a personal attack in your life then I would say it must be a sheltered life indeed. And you're not really into the issues here are you (your intervention at WP:NFCR was off-point and indeed pointless)? But there is a problem with this group and they're not walking over me and my friends the way they do and that's all there is to it. I suppose if you are "mentoring" these juveniles (or so I judge) in some way, then you may have some place here. Otherwise frankly I would prefer it if you minded your business. I don't need lectures from you how to behave. Really. Ayesha23 (talk) 00:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

To be fair I wouldnt hold him being an admin against him; tempting as it is; he was warning you as a just another holy joe, but warning all the same, and with one of those bloody templates when you are clearly a regular editor. Thats just plain rude apart from the fact that that his premise was incorrect from the get go. What I find ofensive frankly is the air of "I will crush you like a bug", with the passive agressive "thank you" sign off. I really think thats baiting, and why so many short term blocks become indeffs. But sign, thats for another days misery for us wondering plebs. Ceoil (talk) 02:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh for goodness sake Ceoil, you know the warning message is Twinkle generated, and no I wouldn't have used it on a regular editor, but to be fair Ayesha has <200 edits. And Ayesha, this is a collaborative encyclopedia, a "robust exchange of views" is fine, it just doesn't need the snarky playground taunts on the end of otherwise reasonable conversation. Now, can we all get back to something more useful? Black Kite (talk) 08:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Black Kite with all due respect, get bent. 'I'm using automated tools' is not an excuse for being presumtious, and if you want to stand there and tell me that being templated doesnt smack, then I dont know what to say to you. Log out and try editing as an IP and see what happens. I've collborate a few times with Ayesha, including on a few DYKs, and though he maybe rough around the edges at times - when fustrated - he tends to make a good point and is heavily orientated towards content, if left in peace. Precisely the sort of editor we should encourage and nurture. But can't because of tools like yours. Ceoil (talk) 10:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I thinks that's quite right from Ceoil. I don't mean the individual pleasant remarks about me, but the general tenure of his remarks about templates and so on. And here indeed is the crux of the problem with this group I've gone heads-on with, as I see it anyway, that for whatever reasons they've lost sight of the fact that editors are human beings with their own commitments and motivations for editing. Being templated does smack, can indeed totally freak you out.

However, I don't want to persist with this, BK. I shall bear your strictures in mind, but I do mean to keep an eye on the deliberations of this group. Some of their calls are just plain wrong. Thanks as always Ceoil. And btw BK, those <200 edits may not demonstrate massive commitment, but some of them at least were quality I hope.

I mean to spend some time improving Wikipedia's coverage of the contemporary art scene, but right now I'm going to take a few days off. Ayesha23 (talk) 03:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Your welcome. Anybody versed in Rogier van der Weyden is always welcome here, despit the semi-automated tools wandering about. Ceoil (talk) 03:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Lute Player (Orazio Gentileschi), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hermitage. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ayesha23 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Not a sock puppet. This is a long standing account in good standing, although I am only able to edit for brief periods. I suspect this arises from my intervention at [1] where I challenged the user Hafspajen in his assertion that the painting was a portrait of Francesca Caccini. Hafspajen is part of Drmies' circle. Drmies cannot be said to be disinterested. He had already blocked an IP in that discussion as a sock of WPPilot. Coat of Many Colours not known to me. And what would be inappropriate about that intervention in any case? Hafspajen was wrong and an administrator had already ruled that the nomination should not go forward in Wikipedia's name.Ayesha23 (talk) 5:59 am, Today (UTC+7)

Decline reason:

Behavioral evidence leaves little doubt that the block is correct.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• Admins don't rule on content, and Gamaliel merely "opposed" the nomination. BTW, for someone who edits so intermittently, you know an awful lot about me and my "circle"--but perhaps you gleaned that from the internet. Like, that Pilot and Hafspajen had something to do with each other. Drmies (talk) 23:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Chris Woodrich would also be part of your circle. Indeed I know a fair bit about you and your circle, but it's not gleaned from the internet my friend. You would do well to consider the IP's remark about his office just a little closer. I can't be both WPPilot and Coat of Many Colours, and in fact I'm neither. Just my own little self, a mere pawn in the great game. Likewise I merely "opposed" that nomination. But for the IP's and my intervention that nomination would have gone through fatuously attributing Francesca Caccini as the sitter in Wikipedia's voice. The National Gallery of Art generously makes its images available in high resolution. The least Wikipedia could do is respect their moral rights. Job done as far as I'm concerned. The IP will be back. Ayesha23(talk) 00:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Offer Hafspajen my sandbox. I should be amused to see what he makes of this portrait of an 11th great grandfather of mine. Or perhaps you could start it for me. I'll complete it on IP if you like and you agree not to get all upset about socks and stuff. Ayesha23 (talk) 00:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

No one was blocked as a sock of Pilot. Drmies (talk) 01:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Locked out. You protected the page. When the IP remonstrated on your Talk page, you made it clear that you thought he was WPPIlot, load of stuff about talking shit about you off-wiki. Apparently he accuses you of filching your student's term papers as your own Wikipedia articles, which might indeed explain why they're often so poor. Do you do H's as well ? I mean seriously M, what is all this protectionism about. He puffs himself up as god almighty, gives a slightly wicked editor absolute hell (as he did Coat Of Many Colours, we checked that out). On his user page he declares "Je suis Hafspajen", plainly mocking the horrible Charlie Hebdo attack and for good measure links the page to the Jewish "I am that I am" stuff. He writes absolute crap about art and spends his time distributing very large image files to all and sundry. Is it any bloody wonder he attracts attention? Add in the obviously invented language difficulties and you have a case that bears examination. You need to walk away from all that my friend.

Put my "Portrait of a Merchant" sandbox file in article space and I'll show you what a good art article is. Loads of people do do them, Ceoil, Victoria, Modernist that I know of in my own somewhat specialized editing. H doesn't come close. Ayesha23 (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I saw your website, and your Wikipediocracy comments (boohoo, you got banned there as well?). I don't think you or that IP are Pilot. I don't know why you're bringing that up, except as some kind of validation. Perhaps you and Pilot can start a support group; the Blauwbrug is a real charming location for a midnight meeting of mistreated editors. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

I doubt you would make much of my website and I don't edit at Wikipediocracy. Don't really follow you on the Blauwbrug. Presumably your comment is meant to mock me and since the only connotations of the Blauwbrug I can find are with Jewish culture, I can only assume you mean to make an anti-semitic remark - except I'm not Jewish, that's an Arab name I have. Just because an 11th great-grandaddy of mine was Dutch, doesn't make me Dutch.

I shall get this account unblocked at a later date as events unfold. I don't want to hear from you again. Ayesha23 (talk) 07:10, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Very sorry to read all this - I hadn't made the connection between you, Sextet and Coat. Your right about a few things said recently (content related not on other editors), and you are a *very* skilled and knowledgable writer, but wondering why you are wasting it all on ventattas. You should be more honest, you recently did, and once again have a Wikipediocracy account, and frankly I lOLed at the comment that got you blocked, it was sharp, on the money and (I thought) satirical rather than nasty and pointed. Some of the people you are disenfranchised by here are ok - Crisco in particular is sound, and has integrity. But pfff, dont know why you are backing yourself in to a corner like this - its counter productive - salient points you are making are being hatted, that and the taunting (boo-hoo) I am not very happy about. It seems like a waste that someone with your brain is marginalising herself like this. I would like if you would chat to me here or by email; I think (presumptious me, but been there and done that) you are fustrated and feel wronged, and if that could be worked through maybe a request for a standard offer might be in order. Best. Ceoil (talk) 19:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ceoil. Always nice to hear from you. Thanks very much for your comments and advice. Not sure which of our Wikipediocracy accounts you were referencing :), but if that was the Hempel paradox post (not actually from me) that was certainly meant tongue in cheek (of course we knew we would be blocked immediately). We really do love the old goat and don't mean him the slightest harm or malice (recent support from us over his latest block entirely in good faith). Same with Fae by the way, who gets a pretty raw deal at WO I think.

As I've said before it's complicated. It's not really about art articles at all. But you, Victoria and Modernist, amongst others I have seen, indeed write them very well. Don't bother about me. I've been socking it to Wikipedia pretty well since it started :). Ayesha23 (talk) 21:17, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Fuck off Ceoil, iows. Well, I did say I knew I was being presumptious; obviously you know what you are up to and dont need me to explain the lie of the land. It just seems so pointless; easy targets and all that. I wont be changing your mind and I expect to see you here and there, so well, grand. Ceoil (talk) 21:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

I had to look that up in urban dictionary (the last bit I mean), not being much into in social media. I'm one of those people who find their phone harder to use these days than their computer. I mean I just can't be arsed to go through the manual for the sake of the half dozen people or so I actually do chat to on the phone. Not at all, Ceoil. You know very well I have great respect for the editing you and your friends do. It's just that I really don't want to get involved in the social media side of things. I'm going to put a wikibreak template up. That doesn't reflect in any way on you. If I ever do get this account unblocked, I'll give you a ping. Cheers. Ayesha23 (talk) 07:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Meanwhile

I might nom Oviri (Gauguin) for FAC shortly *if* your ok with it. I'll act as agent during the process, given your current, ahem, "access" issues. Its a fine article on a major artwork. Ceoil (talk) 11:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Following the Gauguin, there is more. I want to push the article on the early Rogier van der Weyden Madonna we worked on together. Ceoil (talk) 23:18, 20 November 2016 (UTC)