User talk:Amandajm/Archives/2011/December

Talk:Family honor

Thank you for your constructive review of the student's article at Talk:Family honor. If you would like to review any more student's work, you may want to check the WP:AMBASSADOR program - we are always recruiting! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 16:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, students are supposed to find good refs. If they don't, they fail a part of the assignment (although DYK is for extra credit). Btw, I am the course instructor for this article :) The assignment page is linked from talk, check the templates there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Cool down. You cannot expect students to start with high quality topic. Like everyone else, they produce poor drafts, and improve them over time. This is how Wikipedia works, and it does not matter how sensitive a subject is. You are aware of Wikipedia's disclaimer, aren't you? The article will improve over time, with the help of students and others. If you care about a given subject, and want to see it improved further, you are more then welcome to become involved and help edit it, or review it and keep offering suggestions. But please, show respect to the others involved, even if they do not produce high quality content with every single edit. As sad as this is, your average student, just like your average Joe (or an average editor) doesn't get everything perfect in one try. PS. Regarding your edits to the article, would you be so kind and as an experienced Wikipedian, respect WP:CITE and WP:V? You've added content that is unreferened, and as such, also not "wiki perfect"... :> --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 01:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I am sure the students will appreciate any suggestions. I fully agree this is an important topic, I was quite shocked to find it did not exist till my students started their work on it. Hopefully, by the time the assignment ends in mid-December, we will have produced a good and helpful entry on it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 02:10, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Klimt at the Stoclet Palace

I hope you are well and glad to read that you are fan of the Stoclet Palace that I see almost every day as I am living a couple of blocks from it. I hope to visit this incredible building and furnishing before I die ;-) I wish the article was expanded with more pictures but the lack of freedom of panorama in Belgium complicates everything. All the pictures should be used under fair use rationale. We will have to wait 2026 to see more pictures of the house...

I remember Klimt's work at the Mak I saw in Vienna was pretty much unfinished and rough work but with true colors though. Klimt certainly took more than 10 minutes to do it :-D I used the word "sketch" because Rubens preparatory designs are also referred to as sketches (e.g.: http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2008/oct/08/rubens.whitehall). I suggested to rename the file to "Preparatory design", if Commons admins agree. I hope this is ok with you. Alberto Fernandez Fernandez (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Children's Chapel

Thanks for the link to the Liturgy Guide - very good! Also thanks for the further suggestions on the St James' article. I haven't been able to work on it for a while, partly because I was responding to feedback about the DYK nomination of the Chapel article. It looks like it is close to going ahead. Will get back to the parent article soon. Whiteghost.ink 02:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC) Re the HSC - Been there, done that. :) Enjoy! Whiteghost.ink 03:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The Entombment (Bouts)

I'm going to put this up for FAC in the next few days, and for better or worse, am interested in your view. You have a lot of knowledge of the area and I want to draw from it, if thats ok. For eg; the article (ie me) is currently confused about the term z-spun; its mentioned in a few sources, but never explained. I've not found any proper overview in my sources and dont want to gom down the google books route, so asking here. Any help appreciated. Best. Ceoil (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

I've edited and responded to your cmts on the talk. I want to expand on the linen, can you keep an eye. Thanks. Ceoil (talk) 21:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Myself and Truthkeeper have spent the night agonising and fighting over what on it to include and what not to. I'm throwing my hands up, its out of my dept. She seems to have a good grasp (clarified the z-spun) and far more than me; would appreciate if you could plot with her. Thanks as always. Ceoil (talk) 02:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

He thats fine, I suppose I was chancing my arm; I see the work you are doing. No harm in asking and best to ya. Ceoil (talk) 02:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I've met all your requests and depreciated the claims you spotted as exessive. Can you take another look pls. Ceoil (talk) 21:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Amandajm. It's nothing seriously important, but if you could drop me a line at your convenience via "email this user"... Best, Kafka Liz (talk) 04:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Mignini and image

Hello, Amandajm. You have new messages at SlimVirgin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 21:49, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Sydney meetup

Hi again Amandajm! You are listed here as interested in Sydney meetups, so I thought I'd let you know about one on this Saturday at 5pm at the Alexandria Hotel. Details here: Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/November_2011. It would be great to see you. --99of9 (talk) 00:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Leonardo

Hi Amanda, good work with the updating. I moved the "lost works" section back up as you then have two lists of works almost definitely by Leonardo, one extant and the other other lost. But I'm not too attached to that order, and had I checked the page history first and seen seen it was someone who knows what they're doing who made the move, I would probably have left it as it was.

You've said that dates are "just someone's speculation", but how would you feel about bringing the dates in line with the latest scholarship – I'm thinking of the NG exhibition catalogue (which I'll have at Christmas) and Martin Kemp's handy list at the back of his Leonardo, which in the latest edition includes the Salvator Mundi and La Bella Principessa? (Unfortunately it's only the 2004 edition that I've got.) Where there are differences of opinion we'd be upfront about it, so we'd have something that looks like this:

Portrait of Foo

1500 (Syson 2011)

c. 1498 (Kemp 2011)

I could start with Kemp 2004 now, and when I get hold of a copy of the new edition I could update it. To take one example of a possible upset that could result from this, Kemp puts the Annunciation and Madonna of the Carnation earlier than Leo's contribution to the Baptism of Christ, which spoils Vasari's story about the Baptism being the painting with which he's "discovered" in Verrocchio's workshop, but it seems very likely to me due to the relative stiltedness of the first two. Ham 14:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words! I love the drawing of the hands but fine as it is I don't think it's quite the same as cartoons for never-executed paintings, which is what Isabella and the Burlington House cartoon are. If we include every beautiful drawing by Leonardo in the list of "major extant works" where do we (excuse the pun) draw the line? The codex section definitely needs expanding, whether on this page or branched off to a new one. And thanks for the tip with the website! Ham 15:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I can't fault your logic, though I wonder if, despite the obvious superiority of the landscape in the Madonna of the Carnation to that of the Baptism, the painting of the Madonna's head (whose hairstyle at the very least is a Verrocchio 'type') might not predate the Baptism angel, which has had life breathed into it and has so much more lustrous curls of hair. We know he left a lot of paintings unfinished for a long time; perhaps this is one he came back to, to paint the landscape? That's not meant as a criticism of your edit of course! I'm considering adding Frank Zöllner's 2007 Leonardo da Vinci: Complete Paintings and Drawings for a third opinion on dates, when I can get hold of that. After I've had a proper read of Syson (realistically after Christmas) I might consider overhauling the Attribution status section – is there really any doubt any more about the attribution of Ginevra and Cecilia? Things have moved on since 1967. Ham 18:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Eucalyptus regnans

Thanks for not just reverting changes, but instead taking the time to fix up the photos and gallery. Appreciated. —Pengo 22:21, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Hamlin

Yes, I admire Hamlin's work greatly and when she was invited to lunch with the Queen, I noticed her article needed work. An explanation would have been scary for the young girls but it is instructive to realise that any of us could have been in need of Hamlin's services, had we not been so fortunate in the time and place of our own birth. I don't know if that would have got through to such a young audience though, who might rather have needed to hear that they are unlikely to have the problem that she fixes. Impressive effort on the speaker's part! Whiteghost.ink 04:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)