Talk:Cherryl Fountain/Archive 1

Material removed from the article

The following material has been removed from the article by another editor. I have copied it here because its content is important in the appreciation of the areas of development covered by this artist. Some of the titles listed here were created in response to the two bursaries, which involved work in Italy and Spain. This evidence of Italian and Spanish work is not covered in the rest of the article. There is also evidence of family portraits and of works influenced by the local Kent environment. Storye book (talk) 17:45, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

On 28 occasions, between 1975 and 2013, Fountain's work was accepted for show at the Royal Academy Summer Exhibitions. The exhibits were: drawing 164 Cottage Windowsill (1975); oil 144 Cowslips in a Kentish Landscape, oil 646 Mother Knitting in the Kitchen Corner, oil 1167 Elders in the Aviary (1976); oil 988 Summer Garden (1977); linocut 719 Borth Collection (1976); oil 1135 Perugian View From Assisi To San Domenico (1979); oil 977 Broadstairs Beach, oil 1116 Perugia, the Aqueduct and Via Appia (1980); oil 470 Skull and Witchesbroom oil 1126 Perugia Pigeons above Via Acquedotto (1981); watercolour 249 Gardens from the Aquaduct, Perugia, oil 1188 Albert's Wistaria, Harry's Irisis, oil 1474 Old Estate Cottages, Lees Court (1982); watercolour 164 Burgos, watercolour 208 Perugia View From the Primavera, oil 1116 Boy With Rabbit (1983); oil 1235 Cottage Gardens (1984); watercolour 731 Cuenca Still Life (1985); pva 601 Indian Summer in a Kent Garden (1986); oil 148 After Chelsea, oil 224 San Pedro from the Posada Garden, Cuenca, oil 260 San Pedro from the Posada Garden, Cuenca, Spain (1987); oil 1040 Julian: The Collector (1988); oil 437 Breakfast Time (1989); oil 344 Ancient And Modern (1990); pva 989 Spring in the Lime Walk (1992); watercolour 731 Cottage Garden, Sissinghurst (1993); pva 298 Actea to Assam (1994); watercolour 710 Consider the Lilies (1996); watercolour 972 From East to West (1997); watercolour 764 This Year Jerusalem (2000); watercolour 610 It's a Colourful Life (2001); pva New Beginnings (2002); watercolour 543 Sky High (2003); watercolour 513 A Time to Sow (2004); watercolour 544 Gardener's Alphabet (2011); watercolour 1120 Lonely Hearts Club (2013). According to Kent Online, Fountain exhibited in 2006 also.

Works include the Baptismal Roll for Selling Church, Kent and portraits of Nigel Nicholson and Claire Palley. Work for the National Trust Foundation for Art includes projects at Sissinghurst Castle Garden, Nymans, Stoneacre, Barrington Court and Mompesson House. In 2013 she created a backdrop for Jim Marshall's Malmaison Carnations exhibit, which won a gold medal at the Hampton Court Flower Show. At the 2015 Chelsea Flower Show, Fountain produced backdrops for Irises bred by Cedric Morris, for the Howard Nurseries' gold medal exhibit in the Grand Pavilion.

References

Discussion

Yes, I removed a large amount of superfluous material from the article. First of all I am surprised that you have the autopatrolled bit, since the article had around a dozen defects when I came to it: no talk page, no wikiprojects, no ratings, no authority control, no defaultsort. Secondly there was a large image gallery of "visual influences" made up of images from the local area. That is clearly original research. The external links section contained blogspot.com, an ebay image (!) and an amazon.com link. I count nine problems so far...

Further, the group shows material above is just not that important. It suffices to say she was in the 26 shows. One does not need to know their titles. I have also removed the commissions section, which is a list of backdrops that she painted for other people on contract. The sourcing amounts to her web site, a garden company and a couple of one-line mentions in obscure garden show periodicals. SO that makes eleven errors by my count. There are others; see the article history. I would suggest running something like this through AFC in future.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

• Firstly, I always put the wikiprojects on the talk page as soon as I can, but you did that (35 minutes after article publication) while I was still fixing the What Links Here aspect, and I did that immediately after I published the article. There are some things which one has to do one by one immediately after publishing the article, and I was in the process of doing that. So please don't attempt to reprimand me for not setting up the wikiproject templates before publishing the article. How dare you. I have published over 100 articles over the last decade or so, this is the first time I've seen anyone jump to the conclusion that I wasn't doing that fast enough. If you care to check my other published articles (excluding the first few perhaps), you will see that the talk page has always been done on the same day as the article publication. I think that is very rude behaviour on your part. Please stop that. I have suffered enough bullying on Wikipedia in the past, and I am sick of it. I have never been asked to do authority control or defaultsort. All you needed to do was to inform me that it is some kind of offence not to do that, with a link to the appropriate rule page. That is how to deal with things without rudeness. Regarding the links to the images of pictures - that is what they were - just links to pictures. The problem with blogs is that people tell lies, but the pictures are just pictures, and the fact that they are blogs doesn't make any difference. If I am wrong about that, then fair enough, but a polite discussion would have sorted that out. I do not agree with you about the titles of works which you have removed from the article. They are independent artworks, and there is no evidence to say that they are not. All or most of the Old Master portrait painters produced portraits by commission. No-one dismisses them as "just work" unless there is some issue of quality. I don't agree that only exhibitions count as art, or that only exhibitions can be included in an artist biography. It looks to me as if your comments on this talk page are an attempt to initiate some sort of edit war. Well, sorry, I'm not biting. If that point from you about AFC is meant to be an insult, then frankly, that is not the way to behave here. If you cannot be nice, please do not attempt to contact me again. Storye book (talk) 19:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I mentioned the errors above as my take is that the article puffs up this person's accomplishments. The commissions section (painting backdrops for displays at garden shows?) is an effort to make something routine and unimportant into something important. Another example of the puffery is that the lede cites that she has been accepted to 26 editions of the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition. That is a show that takes 1000 artists a year. It's a small accomplishment that does not particularly represent critical recognition. In fact that is what is missing here: it's a long article that does not include much of any sourcing that is critical commentary, unless I have missed it. The sourcing here is from items like garden shows, old birth certificate databases and mentions in small newspapers. I think this would actually survive AfD, as she is in one collection. However it is pretty clear that she's a more or less run of the mill painter. Any of my edits, which were triggered by the addition of her name to the list of contemporary artists (which she does not meet the list criteria for) are meant to reduce the puffery. Finally, if you have created 100 articles you should know by now that the section titled "some rural influences" is original research on your part and entirely unacceptable. I'm not sure if you know her or not, and I wonder how you could know that the given images would be visual influences in her work? It seems entirely made up. If you are going to include made up original research in your articles, then yes, AFC is a good idea. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

For the second time, please do not talk to me. I find you offensive. Your insults to the subject of the biography and to me are also causing me distress. Storye book (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

This is the article talk page, and it's where editors talk about the problems with the article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree. It's not a place for you to bully me. Of course the given images are not visual influences - how could they be? It is you who made that up. The point is that the artist's work frequently represents local rural matters (e.g. farming, flowers etc.) and the artist has a rural background. That is the connection. Because many readers are not in Britain and do not know what rural Kent looks like, I put the pictures in for those readers: the rural environment influences the rural subjects of the art - and this is what that part of Kent looks like, i.e. rural. So for the second time, please do not talk to me. I find your wilful misunderstanding offensive. Your insults to the subject of the biography and to me are also causing me distress. Storye book (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

You as a regular user cannot ban editors from article talk pages. If you do not want to interact here, do not reply. The rural influences section is something you made up on your own to add to the article. in any case it need not be discussed as I have removed it.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: and also @Storye book: Perhaps it would be better for editors to say "the article this, or the article that", versus personalizing the comments by saying "you this and you that". I think this would be more neutral, as the article is the main point. It is often difficult to express the "tone" of our comments, on WP, so I think we should err on the side of neutrality. Thanks. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:00, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, I think that it must be a bit of a tender and vulnerable moment, when one has just published a new article. A bit of diplomacy or even human kindness, will go a long way towards encouraging other editors in their work. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)