Talk:Art Gallery of Alberta

Article and building content

absolutely no information on collections or programming, but multiple paragraphs on the building and architect? article reads like the building is an empty shell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.130.49 (talk) 18:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you care to add? 117Avenue (talk) 23:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

i haven't even been inside the building, since i no longer live in edmonton, so i would feel uncomfortable adding and updating that information. but *something* has to be inside, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.53.43 (talk) 16:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Controversy, city budget, and relevant disappointment

The article portrays people's acceptance of the gallery as overwhelmingly positive, which it certainly is to some people, but there was a large degree of discontent with the amount of city/provincial funds spent on the gallery. This should be included. The art gallery was a very size-able expenditure during a time when the city overspent its budget and decided to sell off major assets from EPCOR, of which Edmonton was the sole owner and used to fund approximately 25% of its budget in recent years. It is not without merit that there is some controversy, and it is not trivial. Of course, the article should be balanced. The argument for the gallery, primarily being that a city should invest in its arts community, is a very valid point. The controversy and funding concerns should not go without mention though as they were/are public concerns that are relevant to the gallery. David.aloha (talk) 11:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

suggested new section on notable past exhibitions and publications

Suggestion to add a section on notable past exhibitions and publications. Need to ensure sources are balanced between AGA and others.

Some areas we can look for information include:

• Search Globe and Mail, Edmonton Journal, Canadian Art and Border Crossings for exhibition reviews
• https://www.youraga.ca/exhibitions/past-exhibitions & https://www.youraga.ca/about-aga/publications
• https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Edmonton+Art+Gallery%22
• 1987 task force report https://archive.org/details/edmontonartgalle00edmo/mode/2up

Viola-Ness (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

suggested additional information

Expand Permanent Collection section to include other notable artists, including more women artists, and more images of work from the collection (either public domain or ones with ther permission of the artist) https://www.youraga.ca/about-aga/collection Expand Permanent Collection section to include notable indigenous artists collected through the notable Word Mark grant: https://www.youraga.ca/exhibitions/wordmark

Raejoymay (talk) 18:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Not to impose, but "your first link given" is already extensively referenced (its cited five separate times in the Permanent Collection section). I mean, I might've missed one, but as far as I remember, every artist listed there that had their own Wiki article, is already in the Permanent Collection section of the article.

Also, we can't simply "take images" from the AGA's website. Works of art (especially modern and contemporary works) have a copyright that is typically owned by the museum/owner, or the artist. This is why the majority of images in articles about art museums use paintings/images with an expired copyright/in the public domain (see Wikipedia:Non-free content for further details).

In saying that though, I did add the artists listed in the Wordmark link you provided (well, the ones that had articles, Boyer, Drever, Malbouf), and expanded on photographers within the collection (wasn't previously listed). In saying that though, the larger issue with that section is the lack of third-party verification from reliable sources (at this point and time, most of the sources are from AGA, which is self-published referencing). Leventio (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Leventio, I'm working with Raejoymay to organize a A+F edit-a-thon so we accidently duplicated our comments above about the permenant. We're working on now finding some more research and sources outside the AGA to help add more information to the collections page.

A big thank you for jumping in there and adding those new artists ! Much appreciated and a great addition. You're right to note about the images, we'll be doing some training and support specifically around the wikicommons and art. Viola-Ness (talk) 20:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)