ArtnHistory
Welcome! edit
|
Guide to referencing edit
Click on "show" on the right of the orange bar to open contents.
| Using references (citations) |
|---|
|
I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can remove unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started. If you need any assistance, let me know. -- Ty 11:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, and authorised web sites. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is original research (e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research), or another wikipedia article.
The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section (unless it already exists). This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:
The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):
Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference.
Open the edit box for this page, copy the following text (inserting your own text where indicated), paste it at the bottom of the page and save the page:
(End of text to copy and paste.) It should appear like this:
You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For an online newspaper source, it might look like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Note the single square brackets around the URL and the article title. The format is:
Make sure there is a space between the URL and the Title. This code results in the URL being hidden and the title showing as a link. Use double apostrophes for the article title (it is quoted text), and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics). Double square brackets round the name of the paper create an internal link (a wikilink) to the relevant wikipedia article. Apostrophes must go outside the brackets. The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead.
You can use sources which are not online, but which you have found in a library or elsewhere—in which case leave out the information which is not relevant. The newspaper example above would be formatted like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Here is an example for a book:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Make sure you put two single quote marks round the title (to generate italics), rather than one double quote mark.
These formats are all acceptable for dates:
You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference
The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code:
The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:
You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them. The quotes around the name are optional unless there is a space in the name. You can see multiple use of the same refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are three sources and they are each referenced three times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is.
The above method is simple and combines references and notes into one section. A refinement is to put the full details of the references in their own section headed "References", while the notes which apply to them appear in a separate section headed "Notes". The notes can be inserted in the main article text in an abbreviated form as seen in Harriet Arbuthnot or in a full form as in Brown Dog affair.
More information can be found at: |
File copyright problem with File:Karl Pink Moment400.jpg edit
Thank you for uploading File:Karl Pink Moment400.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Welcome edit
Hello, ArtnHistory, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for California Plein-air painting. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 23:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
May 2010 edit
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to the page Paul Dougherty (1877-1947). Blank pages can confuse readers, and are overall not helpful to the Wikipedia project; furthermore, blanking a page is not the same as deleting it.
If the article you blanked is a duplicate of another article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalized, please revert it to the last legitimate revision. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please use the appropriate deletion process. 5 albert square (talk) 23:43, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, unintentional. I was working on the article and someone did the redirect while I had it open and I was unaware and thus the blank page was born. ArtnHistory (talk) 00:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I see you blanked this page, after its content was moved to Paul Dougherty (artist). I'm assuming you want the former page deleted. Am I right or did I misunderstand you? Salvio ( Let's talk 'bout it!) 23:45, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I did not intend to blank out anything. Someone came along and put the redirect in while I was working on the article. Thus I became confused and the changes I was working on were lost and the old page was suddenly blank. I have relatively new to Wikipedia and I am working with some other art authorities to bolster the area of California Art and some areas of American Art which lack representation and/or are poorly researched or inadequate. I didn't intend to leave a blank page. Initially I tried to put Paul Dougherty under that name, but there is already a soccer player with the same name and I couldn't figure out how to list a second person with the same name. So, no harm intended. I have a great deal of expertise in writing about art, but find wikipedia to be counter intuitive and cumbersome. Its a great concept, but I don't find the process particuarly user friendly. I tried find someone here in Los Angeles to tutor me, but I can't find a way to locate someone geographically. Thanks ArtnHistory (talk) 23:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- No problem! And, above all, no harm was done.
- Wikipedia is an extemely complex environment and we know it; in fact, we have a policy, WP:BITE, that aims at making newbies feel welcome, even though they may make good faith mistakes. If you wish for a tutor, you can go here and find an adopter, that is to say an experienced user who will follow you and help you when in need.
- Or you can put this tag {{helpme}} on your talk page, followed by your question. An experienced user will come here and help you out.
- Or, if you prefer, feel free to drop a line on my talk page. ^_______^ Salvio ( Let's talk 'bout it!) 00:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Your recent edits edit
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, forget the tildes. Sorry. Know about them. I am just always wondering about these people who want to rate anything they don't know about for deletion or as something that reads like a fan page. I am a serious scholar and have problems with the unfriendly, unhelpful people I find here. They cannot contribute anything constructive, only nitpick in areas they seem to have no feeling, affection or knowledge of. They are fine with page after page of "notable" porn actresses or pop culture figures but get up in arms about visual artists or someone with a clear significance in a field they are uneducated in. ArtnHistory (talk) 18:47, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hello -- there are certainly other editors here who agree with your point of view. But I dropped by simply to suggest that you might include the occasional in-line citation in your articles, since they are quite long and list many references. (For more on that topic, see WP:CITE and Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.) For what it's worth, you'll find that the trigger-happy editors magically leave articles alone when they see the odd footnote in them. (Harvard citations tend to be overlooked, though, which tells you something.)
- In any case thanks for your contributions to the visual arts. Riggr Mortis (talk) 05:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
I like your page. Thanks for the comments. Actually, I have a plan in mind. I am getting a number of pages close to "finished" and then, I will address the cites. Most people on wiki are like you, here for the right reasons, but there are always some petty tyrants who like to come by and slag on things. I have a vast library of art reference on various painters, archives, photos, and I am trying to work with some other people to buttress some of the areas that are lacking here, but it can get very ADD as I start to link to another artist, sometimes someone pretty major one, and find they don't have an entry either. Over the next few years I will probably do hundreds of articles. I actually wrote a little essay on notability for artists, where would I post it, so I could reference it and link it for "trigger happy" editors? I have tried to give some thought as to guidelines that should be pretty commonsensical. I would like to put them up for discussion, but not only when I want to send them, but for others working in the art area. I realize there can be difficulty when it comes to living artists like musicians, but I think I have something pretty straightforward to post. As for other criticisms, some things are in the eye of the eye of the reader. I write a lot professionally (with editors as I am notorious as far as typos and such) but until wikipedia, never been accused of writing a "fan page" as I don't say anything effusive
- Thanks. That sounds like a plan (although it would seem harder to add citations after the fact... I know I'd never get around to it). I can as usual point you to a few things. Regarding essays, there is WP:ESSAY--but you can also make a subpage in your user space with an essay. For example: User:ArtnHistory/EssayName. The essays posted in "Wikipedia:" space are likely to be of more general interest than topic-specific. So that brings me to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts group. Projects on Wikipedia tend to exist in name only, but there are at least a few active participants in VA. Messages are posted on the talk/discussion page, as usual: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts. When proposing anything (I'm speaking generally of Wikipedia), know that you will meet substantial opposition and nothing will likely happen. (Well, that's my opinion.) Better to take it slow and seem respectful of the current system, or alternately ignore anything to do with arguing about policy, which I've come around to. Regards Riggr Mortis (talk) 23:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi ArtnHistory. I was about to say what Riggr Mortis beat me to re: essays, userpage, and visual arts discussions. Sometimes it seems like nickle and dime stuff, but if you frontload the inline cites your articles will receive nary a template even from the most pedantic contributors. I'm a painter and teacher who writes professionally as well, and I support virtually everything I add here with reliable sources. Good luck and happy editing. By the way, I see you started the article on Richard Miller--just a few weeks ago I commented that he was due! JNW (talk) 23:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Inline citations are key to getting material retained on Wikipedia. See WP:REFB as suggested above. Ignore at your peril. Also it's important not to express a point of view, opinion or evaluation, unless it comes from a source and is referenced as such. If necessary, place a cite by a phrase or even an indvidual word, if it is likely to be challenged as WP:PEACOCK, for example. Long sections of text need to be broken up into shorter paragraphs for ease of reading. The WP:LEAD (introduction section} should be a summary of the main article text, and usually not introduce new matter not found in the main article. Ty 00:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Please feel free to make any alteration to the images. I attempted to find relevant ones, but I know nothing about the subject, apart from what I have read in the article. I have left edit summaries to explain other changes, so if you click on "view history", you will see the rationale. Re. images, it is best to remove the frames from pictures, as they are not normally included in reproductions. I presume some frames may even have a copyright on their design, which might add an additional complication. Feel free to ask for input from me or other editors, or post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts. Ty 03:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I leave frames to your judgement. The copyright issue would be the main concern. If they were designed specifically, or by the artist, it would be good to note that (maybe in a footnote - when you get the hang of them!). Of course the original impressionists had ideas about frames, but they have long been ignored. Ty 04:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
References section: please note this section should only contain sources that have been cited inline as references for article content. As yet, there are no inline citations, so there should be nothing in the references section. It would be appropriate to retitle it as "Further reading". Ty 05:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Visual arts
You are welcome to join WikiProject Visual arts, a collaboration between like-minded Wikipedians in order to improve visual arts coverage.
Caution edit
Just a cautionary note. You may not be aware, as a new user, that editors are expected to keep to just one user name to avoid WP:SOCK. Ty 05:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I noticed some new editors contributing around the same time to what are relatively obscure subjects. You need to make sure you are in the clear here. This is not normally an issue, but does become one, should any conflict arise with other editors, or in the case of debates such as WP:AfD. The basic principle is that each individual person is expected to edit from one account. Multiple people should not use the same account per WP:ROLE. "Closely related accounts" may be classed as a single account, if they appear to be operating as such per WP:SHARE, or per WP:MEAT. There is no accusation of wrong-doing in what has occurred to date—quite the opposite, as substantial good material has been contributed—but the points I have mentioned need to be borne in mind. As a separate matter, when you add a post beneath an existing one, put a colon at the start of the line to indent one space, two colons to indent two spaces etc. Ty 18:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice Ty. I have enlisted others to help me primarily for editing. I have read the guidelines and if I have someone with me, helping me clean up the content I produce, we use my account. If I have someone elsewhere, I e-mail them and ask them to proof, so they make their own judgements and thus are collaborators in a project, not someone I control and I feel they should sign in under their own name. Free range Wikipedians who have different abilities than I do. Although my interests are wide ranging, I intend to stick to (seemingly) non-controversial subjects like art which don't seem to have the edit wars like something like Global Warming would. Life is too short for that for me right now. My hats off to those who try to maintain neutrality on some of those issues. The only issues I think I will see is the quick trigger speedy deletion types, but I can see that the way to avoid those issues is to have all the ducks in a row, text done, references ready, notes done and such. I would not add anyone I am not sure meets the notability standards, but I can see that it is an issue, especially in the music arena. I have written up my own clarification of criteria for artists on my page as the entry/rules for that is pretty limited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtnHistory (talk • contribs)
To avoid falling foul of the rules, note that "we use my account" is not allowed. You may not have intended it to sound the way it does. Only one person is allowed to use one account. It is necessary also because that one person is legally responsible for what they upload (and for any libel, for example), as well as asserting that they license the copyright of their material as GFDL/CC. If someone else helps you research or whatever, it is up to you to sort out such issues with them, but when you (an individual using one account) upload anything, it is your sole responsibility.
Art articles are less prone to dispute than many, but it is not unknown.
If you are working on an article you can put:
- {{inuse}}
at the top to get some time to add references etc. Better still would be to prepare the article in your user space on a sub page, which can be created with e.g. User:ArtnHistory/Draft 1. Substitute any name you prefer for "Draft 1". Click red link to start the page.
Ty 02:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of File:Karl Blue Moment 400.jpg edit
A tag has been placed on File:Karl Blue Moment 400.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. nn123645 (talk) 06:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Gilbert Stuart edit
Hi ArtnHistory, I only just noticed your message from a few days ago about Stuart; nice catch. I don't have the resources to pick up such treasures--there's no room left in my studio anyway--but last year I did grab a beautiful pen and ink at auction by this guy. And another anecdotal bit: yesterday a colleague was passing through town, and over lunch I mentioned Landscape, Branchville, and he, being a big fan of Twachtman and Carlsen, knew the painting well. Cheers, JNW (talk) 00:39, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I love Abbey. I don't have any of his drawings, but I would like to add one. One of the guys I went to art school with was wild about Abbey. Especially the Shakespeare stuff. Abbey was close to Sargent for a time, the period they, the Millets lived together was probably the happiest time in his life. I primarily like drawings these days too, space becomes an issue and I Iike the spontaneity. I have a Carslsen drawing of trees and Flagg, Cornwell, a nice little Blum done when he was in Paris and a L'Hermitte portrait drawing. Had some Sargent Boston studies but they were not consequential enough to keep, drapery studies. I find something to like in a lot of the 19th and early 20th century artists. My tastes and interests are quite catholic. As far as Wikipedia, I am for giving all these older guys their due, especially the educators who sacrificed their careers to teach. I want to write on Macbeth, the great dealer. I have been writing short articles on some of the Midwesterners like Wellington J. Reynolds, Edmund H. Wuerpel, carl Werntz who passed their French knowledge on. I want to also do articles on some of the living painters, I think Mian Situ for example is interesting, especially these large French-style history paintings of Chinese in the Old West. The whole Chinese academic system, which evolved from the Soviet system is interesting and I know a fair bit about it, but have not set anything done yet. There is one old Soviet Socialist Realist painter living in the U.S., Leonid Steele, very interesting guy to talk to with someone to translate, but he's about ninety. I am gradually working on notes for a well-sourced Wikipedia article on American artists in Paris and how the academy and atelier system worked. It was a very interesting system with a lot of contradictions, not simply this prissy caricature that was created after the Impressionist and Post-Impressionist period. Couture and a number of others ran pretty free-wheeling ateliers. I knew Dr. Albert Boime who was the great authority on the French academy, sadly he died a year or so ago. He was a real character, a Marxist with a passion for drawing and academic art. Great speaker. I have his rare book on the French academy and a lot of hard to find accounts including 19th c. letters. I don't know what to call a Wki article, American Art Students in Paris,
Americans in Paris: 1850-1900, or American Artists in Parisian Ateliers. Glad to have artists contributing here, I want to recruit more, one of the things I used to speak of with Dr. Boime was how artists have been written out of art history and of course, as practitioners, you will have special insights. ArtnHistory (talk) 03:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, this is fun, with a lot of bases to cover. I'll be brief as possible for now. As I recall, Abbey got Sargent the Boston library murals commission. Growing up, we had 3 large Abbey paintings, as well as numerous Cornwells, Harvey Dunns, Leyendeckers, Flaggs, a Rockwell, etc, mostly sold now. I know very little about the Chinese and Russian academies, except that they have a strong reputation for solid life training. Yes, I have read that Couture was an open teacher, and a good painter, apart from 'The Romans of the Decadence', though Manet finally couldn't abide by him... Charles Gleyre, an unexciting picture maker, had a number of future impressionists in his classes, so even though he was supposed to have been stuffy he was apparently amenable to the young turks. I remember Boime's catalog from the French academy show--could it have been at the Brooklyn Museum?--when I was studying. Keep up the good work. I'm sure we'll chat more. JNW (talk) 03:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Glad you started Penfield. JNW (talk) 04:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Checking in edit
Just dropping by to say hello--it's been a while, and I hope all is well. Cheers, JNW (talk) 22:40, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Leblant photo.jpg edit
Thank you for uploading File:Leblant photo.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rama (talk) 12:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The original author is not specified, which makes it impossible to affirm that he'd had died over 70 years ago.
Incidentally, I have photographed a number of drawings of soldiers of the First World War, currently on display at Saint-Maurice.
Congratulations for the article, I dreaded having to create it myself. Rama (talk) 12:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Pictorialist-cover.jpg edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pictorialist-cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.
We're recruiting art lovers! edit
| Archives of American Art Wikimedia Partnership - We need you! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the Smithsonian Archives of American Art and I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about art to participate in furthering art coverage on Wikipedia. I am planning contests and projects that will allow you access, no matter where you live, to the world's largest collection of archives related to American art. Please sign up to participate here, and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 00:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC) |
Possibly unfree File:VonSchneidau 500.jpg edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:VonSchneidau 500.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Image source problem with File:Vonschneidau elwoodriggs.jpg edit
Thank you for uploading File:Vonschneidau elwoodriggs.jpg.
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.
If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:Vonschneidau pickford.jpg edit
Thank you for uploading File:Vonschneidau pickford.jpg.
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.
Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
- The source is my own 30+ year old photograph. Von Schenidau was lifelong friends with my own teacher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.4.67 (talk) 16:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
OK; which image are you referring to? Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Victormatson 500.jpg edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Victormatson 500.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:53, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Talkback edit
Message added 18:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Message added 22:03, 22 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- It would be great if you could respond on my talk page; we were so close to keeping the images. Apologies for causing too much stress (my father had a stroke too). Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:01, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
At the moment you claim authorship on some of this painters paintings such as File:Leblant-marine.jpg. You can put yourself in the source field of your uploads because you possibly made the reproduction, but remove your name from the author field. You are not the author of this paintings, not entirely (I refere to your statement "I (ArtnHistory (talk)) created this work entirely by myself") and not partialy. Also you have no right to put this paintings under a license requesting attribution to you. This works are in the public domain. Thank you for correcting your uploads. --Martin H. (talk) 11:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
The article Harriet Hallowell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- This biographical article seems to be based almost entirely on original research and unpublished documents. Apart from receiving the Légion d'honneur medal, there is little of any note here.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Sionk (talk) 12:29, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of California Plein-Air Revival for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article California Plein-Air Revival is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/California Plein-Air Revival until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. JNW (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of Decorative Impressionism for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Decorative Impressionism is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decorative Impressionism until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. JNW (talk) 09:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
You're invited to join WikiProject Women artists! edit
 |
Hello ArtnHistory! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women artists. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women artists, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women artists on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women artists page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement! |
SarahStierch (talk) 19:31, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Leblant_bataille650.jpg edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Leblant_bataille650.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 20:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Karl Through the Trees.jpg listed for discussion edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Karl Through the Trees.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't understand what the problem is? Why would someone want to remove the images when there is no one complaining or claiming copyright? I personally shot the images that I posted many years ago now. Arny Karl died without heirs, without issue, so there is no one to complain about copyright issues for his work, some of which is in museum collections now. His ex-wife cooperated in proofing his biography and material. This mania for removing images that no one has complained about has robbed Wikipedia of countless illustrations. I had an image that I personally shot of a 19th century painting by Julian LeBlant removed by some busybody lunatic with more time than brains. A painting that earned a gold medal in the 1889 Paris World's Fair was tossed in the bin for copyright issues. LOL. Again, no complaint, just a fool "editor" on a power trip. Power trips attempting to remove topical pages before they were even finished. Claims that artists with long exhibition records were not relevant enough, when every band that has ever released a record has a page. The biggest laugh is being tagged for descriptive, non-neutral language, as if the idiots who advance these claims had ever actually read countless thousands of fan-boy pages. This is why I stopped contributing. I have written and lectured on art for decades, have a massive library of English and French language art books and periodicals, but Wikipedia seems to be full of petite fascists who see their role as controlling a particular domain or policing things that don't need it. Meanwhile, article after article has redundant passages, poor editing and glaring bias. 104.13.203.25 (talk) 16:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
File:Karl Windswept Sierras.jpg listed for discussion edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Karl Windswept Sierras.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
File:Karl Blue Moment.jpg listed for discussion edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Karl Blue Moment.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
