 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
Although I could not care less about whether there is a HejSlovak or Nemnemsoha chauvinist slant to the entry, I think that, since there is no category of Zipsian (Szepesi, Spišskí) painters, one might as well keep the category "Slovak painters" in a mostly geographic sense.Tusbra (talk) 13:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Watch your language and keep civil please. Try to use English sources instead of Slovak ones when these are available, because this is the English Wikipedia.
- In a mostly geographic sense "Slovakian painters" would be more correct, less confusing. Squash Racket (talk) 15:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
The artistic importance of the subject is scarcely worth a controversy. As to "English sources" - the ones cited prove nothing beyond the obvious, that Katona was Jewish; and that Patai has some katonas hanging on his walls. So have I, they were once plentiful and rather inexpensive (as they still are). The Hungarian and Slovak sources are about equally hagiographic but the Slovak is at least more recent. Primary English sources do not exist.Tusbra (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- We usually use secondary sources on Wikipedia, not primary ones.
- One of the English sources says he was a Hungarian painter, the other one says he was a Hungarian Jewish painter. (I just hope the book written by Dan Rottenberg and published by Random House is not counted as a "Hungarian source"). Squash Racket (talk) 06:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)