ArtDataArt

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome ArtDataArt!

Hello ArtDataArt. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!

I'm Paine Ellsworth, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:   Introduction to Wikipedia   The five pillars of Wikipedia   Editing tutorial   How to edit a page   Simplified Manual of Style   The basics of Wikicode   How to develop an article   How to create an article   Help pages   What Wikipedia is not

Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:   Do be bold   Do assume good faith   Do be civil   Do keep cool!   Do maintain a neutral point of view   Don't spam   Don't infringe copyright   Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest   Don't commit vandalism   Don't get blocked

If you need further help, you can:   Ask a question

or you can:   Get help at the Teahouse

or even:   Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{Help me}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:   Fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Help contribute to articles   Perform maintenance tasks

Become a member of a project that interests you   Help design new templates   Subscribe and contribute to The Signpost   Translate articles from Wikipedias in other languages

To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your userpage.

Please remember to:

• Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
• Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
  

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!

• Español
• Deutsch
• Français
• Italiano
• עברית
• Русский
• 日本語
• Polski
• فارسی

Sincerely, P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} (Leave me a message) 18:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the warm welcome @Paine Ellsworth, and I'll be sure to remember my tildes. 😊

Best, ArtDataArt (talk) 11:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

my pleasure! Paine  11:09, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Illustrations for Fourteen Poems from C.P. Cavafy (February 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hoary was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Illustrations for Fourteen Poems from C.P. Cavafy and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hoary (talk) 22:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Use of non-free images in galleries, and WP:NFC in general

Greetings and welcome to Wikipedia! Please do not take any of the following as any sort of criticism of your work here. Your edits are appreciated. This is a moment of education, learning one of the many nuances of Wikipedia.

I've removed the gallery of non-free images that you had placed at The Blue Guitar#Prints. The reason for this is described at WP:NFGALLERY. That is a guideline, based upon the WP:NFCC policy, restricting the use of non-free images in galleries. We almost never use such galleries for non-free images. It isn't enough to include a non-free image just to increase understanding. The use of non-free images is usually directly tied into the prose of the article, such that not having the image displayed would compromise the ability of the reader to understand the article. We would never allow the complete works of a particular artist, or sub-collection of their work from a particular period, to be included in an article. Instead, we might (might) use one or two images that reliable, secondary sources indicate are meaningful representations of that particular style of the artist's work.

Note that your inclusion of the 20 images in the gallery raised the number of non-free images in the article to 31. This placed it as the 2nd highest article in terms of non-free use on the entire project. Extreme use like this requires extreme justification, which doesn't exist here. It is enough to include a representation. We don't need 31.

With the removal of the gallery, 19 of the images are now what we call "orphaned" non-free images. This means they are not used anywhere on the project, making them subject to deletion in seven days per WP:NFCC#7. Those images are:

• File:What Is This Picasso? from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Serenade from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:A Moving Still Life from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:On It May Stay His Eye from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:I Say They Are from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Tick It, Tock It, Turn It True from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Etching is the Subject from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:The Poet from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:A Picture of Ourselves from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Made in April from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Figure with Still Life from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:In a Chiaroscuro from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:The Buzzing of the Blue Guitar from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Discord Merely Magnifies from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Parade from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:Franco-American Mail from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:It Picks Its Way from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:A Tune from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney.jpeg
• File:The Old Guitarist from The Blue Guitar by David Hockney 1976-77 400p.jpeg

Again, please understand this is not any sort of criticism of your work, but rather an opportunity to educate you about our WP:NFCC policy, and hopefully make it so that we don't have a similar situation in the future. If you have questions about any of this, let me know. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bianca Raffaella (July 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Voorts was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bianca Raffaella and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

voorts (talk/contributions) 22:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Voorts, Thank you for your review. Please could you explain:

With regards to WP:Notability (artists)

• Would being an internationally invited Keynote Speaker, lecturer and panelist to institutions such as IFM, GI and the TATE not indicate that "1. The person is regarded as an important figure"?

• Alternatively, that Raffaella was invited to speak about her innovative techniques as a visually impaired artist and designer at these institutions meet the criteria "2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique"?

• Would Raffaella's subsequent national television coverage (Channel 4 / BBC Productions) demonstrating her techniques not also meet the threshold for 2.?

• Also, by 4.(b) "4. The person's work has: (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition" with her specially commissioned artwork for the 'Layers of Vision' exhibition, meet the threshold of notability?

With regards to reliable sources

• In the context of the above, why have you discounted the references, exhibitions, Keynote presentations and national television coverage from the Tate, IFM, GI, Kings College London, Channel 4 / BBC Productions, other museums and leading charities from the UK disability sphere, as being unreliable?

ArtDataArt (talk) 12:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I will respond this evening. voorts (talk/contributions) 13:11, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Would being an internationally invited Keynote Speaker, lecturer and panelist to institutions such as IFM, GI and the TATE not indicate that "1. The person is regarded as an important figure"?

• In my view, no. Plenty of people get invited to talk on panels and as speakers at events. That does not make them an "important figure" in the field of art. Moreover, per GNG, any such speech or lecture should be covered in RSes that are independent of the subject; the fact of a keynote or a keynote speech being announced by the institution hosting it does not make it reliable.

Alternatively, that Raffaella was invited to speak about her innovative techniques as a visually impaired artist and designer at these institutions meet the criteria "2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique"?

• Criteria 2 also requires that any techniques be new; there's no indication that her techniques are new.

Would Raffaella's subsequent national television coverage (Channel 4 / BBC Productions) demonstrating her techniques not also meet the threshold for 2.?

• I don't remember seeing a Channel 4 or BBC cite in the article, but if she received significant coverage in either or both of those, I think that might establish that she meets GNG.

Also, by 4.(b) "4. The person's work has: (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition" with her specially commissioned artwork for the 'Layers of Vision' exhibition, meet the threshold of notability?

• I read the word "significant" in light of notability guidelines; it's a "significant exhibition" if it's covered in RSes. The three cites for that exhibition in the draft are all to King's College London, which was a cosponsor of the event and therefore not independent.

Regarding your final question, here's a partial source assessment:

Source assessment table: prepared by User:voorts
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Please Touch the Art (Tate)	~ Hosted artist		Event announcement.	✘ No
Layers of Vision (KCL)	The artist collaborated with KCL.		This is a description of a piece of artwork.	✘ No
Hushed Impressions (Shape Arts)	~ Hosted artist		Event announcement.	✘ No
Guardian			Artist is mentioned in one sentence	✘ No
Tracey Emin Foundation	This is the artist's bio.			✘ No
Widewalls	? Appears to be a press release	?	Subject mentioned once in passing	✘ No
Civilian		? Appears to have editorial standards	Interview with article subject	? Unknown
Layers of Vision Website	Website for exhibition		Event announcement	✘ No
Layers of Vision (KCL 2)	Collaborated with artist		Event announcement	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

voorts (talk/contributions) 20:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Another helpful resource is WP:SIRS. Although it's an WP:NCORP guideline, it describes what is required for a source to be considered sufficient to establish notability in other areas as well. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

An interview, such as the one in Civilian, is a primary source, and as such does not count towards notability nor GNG. Netherzone (talk) 01:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

The fact that a person is being interviewed at length in an independent publication could go towards establishing GNG; if someone does a significant interview, there was likely a reason to interview them. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:52, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I participate in a lot of Visual Arts deletion discussions as well as NPP and interviews are considered primary sources because they are speaking about themselves. Interviews can be used to verify claims and content, but they do not contribute to GNG - we need fully independent secondary sources for that. Netherzone (talk) 02:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

For more information, see WP:Interviews. Perhaps if this interview was in the New Yorker or Artforum or another publication of that caliber it would hold more weight, but the interview in Civilian does not even have a by-line, and its focus is "travel, intelligence, irreverence". Their "About" states that it is an online "luxury travel magazine", which is non-wiki-notable, and not a visual art publication. So I would definitely say it does not contribute to GNG. Netherzone (talk) 02:32, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks @Netherzone for explaining that artist interviews don't count towards notability. :)

Separately, I noticed you highlighted the FashionUnited source as "not journalism, it is a pay-to-play platform for job seekers and employers according to Fashion United's website under General Terms and Conditions" I wonder if they where the T&Cs for FashionUnited's jobs board, and that their journalism code of ethics can be found separately here: https://fashionunited.info/code-of-ethics and their editorial statute here: https://fashionunited.info/editorial-statute. (Much like The Guardian or New York Times also have job boards). ArtDataArt (talk) 17:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @ArtDataArt, thanks for your note. I apologize in advance for the length of my message. My intention here is to be helpful in explaining notability for artists.

I think you are wise to hold off on resubmitting the draft until the sourcing can support notability. I'm happy to answer any questions (ping me so I know if you have any additional questions). I find Raffaella's work really interesting, however my gut feeling is that it is WP:TOOSOON for an article on her, and am concerned that it might get deleted if it gets moved into article space prematurely. I'm of the mind that it's best to be sure a subject definitely meets notability criteria before devoting too much time to a new article. Also to avoid "ref-bombing" a draft (meaning loading up a draft with many low-quality sources (references) rather than choosing 3 to 5 of the very best sources, and submitting a draft that only features the very highest quality refs.

I did a spot check just after you pinged me, and there are additional problems with the current sources, for example this: [1] is simply a press release, it does not count towards notability at all, as press releases are primary sources drafted by the person, company, gallery or organization's press agent and distributed to publications....in other words it is "from the horses mouth", where as we need citations that are fully independent (secondary sources) in reliable sources, preferably notable publications if possible. This: [2] is a calendar listing, it is meaningless to the encyclopedia re: notability. Here is another calendar listing and event description [3]. And another: [4]. And another event listing (press-release type material) and calendar listing [5].

What we need are actual in-depth reviews of her work WP:SIGCOV in newspapers, art magazines, chapters in art history books and the like, that are fully independent from the gallery or sponsoring organization or artist themself. Things like this: [6] don't count because it is published by Outside In which is the charitable organization that sponsored the show at the RA. Therefore it is connected, non-independent, and a primary source not a secondary source.

I don't have time to go through all 37 sources, but I hope these comments have been helpful. Try to focus on the QUALITY of the sources, not the quantity. Read up on our general notability guideline WP:GNG, and the subject notability guideline, WP:NARTIST. Also read up on reliable sources WP:RS, and this section on Primary, secondary and tertiary sources: WP:PST. And here is our main guideline on notability: WP:N. It's a lot of reading, and I'm sorry for that. It takes a while to understand how Wikipedia defines what constitutes notability. It took me years to wrap my head around it, but thankfully I had some very good mentors like User:DGG who sadly passed away this year, and a learned a lot by attending Wikipedia events in person and by attending the (now defunct) WP online editing school called WikiSoo. WP:WIKISOO.

Regarding the FashionUnited source, if you feel strongly about it, leave it in. However, here is why I'm somewhat skeptical of it: There is no author byline which usually indicates that an "article" is crafted from a press release rather than investigative journalism. It also often indicates that an "article" is actually an advertorial, or native advertising (pay-to-play), an paid placement advertisment that is "disguised" as a real article. Also, it's about her graduate show, which makes me think that the public relations department at her school submitted it. Lastly, I was off-put by their self-description as an "online luxury travel magazine, but not a blog." Other editors/reviewers may disagree.

Re: Keynote speakers...it's great to be invited as a keynote speaker, but just having done the speech doesn't add to notability UNLESS the keynote is covered by an independent source. For example a newspaper writing about how inspiring her speech was.

Re: the Layers of Vision show, while it is a nice feather in her cap, it's not enough to meet NARTIST. What is meant by a notable exhibition is usually a solo show at a notable museum or national gallery for example, the Whitney Biennial, Venice Bienalle, Documenta and the like. We would normally require several high caliber shows.

Another good indication of an artist's notability is that their work is held in several (usually at least three) notable museum permanent collections. I'm assuming in a few years if her career continues to grow this may happen for her.

Forgive me for the length of this message! I just wanted to clarify how I'm scrutinizing the draft as a reviewer. Again, I'd advise you to wait until she is unquestionably notable before resubmitting. She is an awesome up-and-coming artist and fashion designer who just got out of school and has not yet achieved the kind of career success that leads to Wiki-notability. But I'm certain that in a few years she will be, just not now, it's WP:TOOSOON. You can incubate the draft in draft space, and as long as you edit it at least once every 6 months, it will not be deleted. I also highly recommend that you delete all the primary sourcing (you can move this info to the draft talk page so it is not lost), and keep only the 3 to 5 best independent reliable sources. (This essay may be helpful: WP:THREE.

The very best regards to you, and hope this was not too boring of a read! Don't hesitate to ask further questions. Netherzone (talk) 21:14, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks @Voorts, that's really helped me to understand the notability requirements for an artist's Wikipedia article. :)

I've added all the references I can find online, including the Channel 4 reference for GNG, and multiple references for the "Layers of Vision" exhibition (for 4.(b)) which appears to be "significant" to me, certainly within the disability sphere.

Would this now pass a review?

Thank you for your help!

ArtDataArt (talk) 19:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ArtDataArt. Thank you for your work on Peter Greenham. Another editor, Dcotos, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start!, you may expand it bit more. Cheers!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Dcotos}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dcotos (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)