User talk:Modernist/Archive8

Template:North American Indigenous visual artists

I've added related overview articles and list articles to the template, so it meets template guidelines now. Yworo (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will check it out thanks for leeting me know...Modernist (talk) 21:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested in planning a restructuring of that template, based on existing articles at Template talk:North American Indigenous visual artists? Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 03:18, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

I am interested in helping if I am needed. I like the idea of improving that template based on the existing articles, even if it means including links to articles in a wider time span, specific regions, and articles concerning specific artists...Modernist (talk) 03:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, maybe you can add your ideas to Template talk:North American Indigenous visual artists, since most of the recent edits to the template will have to be revised anyway. Cheers, 05:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Copyright - now it's 95 years, apparently??

Please see the renewed discussion at Talk:Paul_Klee#Public_Domain. If what this user is saying is true, it will have repercussions for our use of images in articles about many modern artists who died between 1923 and 1942; Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Robert Delaunay, Kasimir Malevitch, etc. I have to leave for something at the moment but we should really open up discussion at the Village Pump, WPVA, etc. Thanks, Lithoderm 01:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I wanted to thank you for all your diligent work on the List of 20th-century women artists. I know it's a lot of fiddly research, and you've really put a lot into it. Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 01:04, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know that you really kicked that article off in a good way. Appreciated...Modernist (talk) 01:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Art of the American Southwest

Hi Modernist,

I've started building the contents for the article on my user space: User:CaroleHenson/Art of the American Southwest. If you have a chance to take a peak and see if the groupings and contents make sense, that would be great! It would be great to have an artist's perspective. In the meantime, I'll pick away at it. I watch/check back for updates over the next couple of days (considering the black-out). Always great to be able to get an impression from you!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good job Carole, I'll check in there and add some things...Modernist (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Just uploaded a Maria and Julian Martinez (San Ildefonso) wedding vase and Lucy Lewis (Acoma) olla. Hope you can use them! Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Great, thanks...Modernist (talk) 03:25, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Twomorerun

Hi. I wanted to point you to this page in my user space, where I'm accumulating information about this user. I still have to add diffs and clean it up, but feel feel to contribute if you're interested. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ken - there's this thread [1] - about this guy too - User:24.11.246.211...Modernist (talk) 03:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've filed at AN/I [2] Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hi Modernist, just a note to thank you for your kind note a few weeks ago, as well as the wine and roses, and to let you know that I'm (sort of) back. Not quite there yet, but making a few edits, and enjoying not being so involved. I hope you're keeping well yourself. All the best, and thanks again, SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 07:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that you are beginning to feel better, and thanks for the tulips...Modernist (talk) 12:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seated Nude

Hi, while I agree that painting is fine in the gallery, this image is generally refered to as "Seated Nude" Please see [3][4] [5][6]. Also in the second image, the woman has a large lower jaw as described in this book. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 12:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. The title of the painting used here as are many titles of many paintings by Modigliani and other artists is descriptive - often by curators, authors and various others - not necessarily by the artist. In this case the painting appears to be in the collection of the museum in Hawaii and seems to have been uploaded with the descriptive title Seated Nude, 1918 which is fine as a reasonable description of the work. Whether or not there are other works by Modigliani with similar titles does not negate this painting and its title. The painting that you are linking to is Seated Nude, 1916 by the way - different year, similar descriptive title...Modernist (talk) 12:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying! --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 13:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Chamberlain (sculptor)

At the John Chamberlain (sculptor) article, can I put a "Quotes" section after the "Legacy" section, and put in it the following:

Speaking about the "meaning" of his work he has said "Even if I knew, I could only know what I thought it meant.” In allusion to how he worked he has said “When a sculpture is nearly done, you can put things on and you take them off and it doesn’t make any difference…", and “Stopping is the key; you have to know when to stop. If I feel so glad that a sculpture is here, and I don’t care who did it, then I figure it’s a good piece.” [7]

I like the quotes. Is it OK to have a "Quotes" section? Are there any other problems? Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 01:04, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we have good sources - add them...Modernist (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 04:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chamberlain was quite a character - one of a kind...Modernist (talk) 04:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He seems a likable, honest, down-to-earth, smart person. Bus stop (talk) 04:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's stretching it; he was brash, rude, direct, arrogant and brilliant. He was insightful, pushy and also sensitive and when he wanted to be - kind. A mixture of many things...Modernist (talk) 04:14, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you met him. It is smart of him to talk about the ending of an effort at making a sculpture. He speaks in concrete terms, describing a sensation that he probably knows well, of a sculpture being "nearly done", and the sense that "you can put things on and you take them off and it doesn’t make any difference", and that when he can appreciate it irregardless of who made it—then he figures "it's a good piece"! I think he is saying that it is not his ego telling him that he made a good sculpture, but rather that as a viewer it is something he can appreciate. Bus stop (talk) 04:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John was very smart, he was vocal in associating his sculpture with abstract expressionism...Modernist (talk) 04:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be very much abstract expressionistic sculpture. David Smith (sculptor) is one other that I see on our pages. Bus stop (talk) 11:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC) Bus stop (talk) 11:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions quite a few from that era, or closely related to it - David Smith, and his wife Dorothy Dehner, Herbert Ferber, Isamu Noguchi, Ibram Lassaw, Theodore Roszak, Phillip Pavia, Mary Callery, Richard Stankiewicz, Louise Bourgeois, Louise Nevelson, David Hare, John Chamberlain, James Rosati, Mark di Suvero, Richard Lippold, Herbert Ferber, Raoul Hague, George Rickey, Reuben Nakian, Tony Smith, Seymour Lipton, and Joseph Cornell.

OK. I stand corrected. I like several of them. I have to admit to being unfamiliar with a few of them. Bus stop (talk) 12:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get into what I would call the "cult of personalities" when it comes to artists and art. I try to be art-objective. I like the statements that some artists make about their work. In a sense what they say is important to understanding their work. But of course only certain statements are revealing, or so it seems to me. I have always liked John Chamberlain's sculptures but they don't fit into any overarching theories I might have about art. (Not that my overarching "theories" amount to a hill of beans.) In fact I would say that Chamberlain's sculptures are clunkers—refusing to find a place in my ideas about art at all. Nevertheless I like them. Reading him speak cogently about his art-making process is mildly shocking. I'm happy to get those quotes into the article. Credit has to go to whoever wrote the NY Times article, I guess. Maybe I'm making more out of those few quotes than is warranted, but somehow they seem like a key to a deeper insight to his sculptures. Bus stop (talk) 21:35, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tried adding another quote at another artist's article here. Bus stop (talk) 22:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She's amazing, I saw a show of her paintings - around 2005 I think, a real discovery...Modernist (talk) 22:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She is. I thought she was Ellsworth Kelly. I somehow stumbled upon this image online and I thought hey, I've never seen that Ellsworth Kelly painting. Bus stop (talk) 22:46, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothea Tanning

If you feel this is too opinionated it can be altered—especially the second question/response, but I personally like it a lot. Bus stop (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like the quotes too...Modernist (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External Links, Spam and User:Piero79

Hi, I noticed that you removed some links posted by user Piero79. I have found very (very!) many links to the same site posted by this user. I have tried removing them from Wikipedia (see my contributions list) but cannot cope. You seem a very experienced user perhaps you know how to revert/remove all these spam links Piero79 has added. I guess there must be a tool can do it, but I dont even know where to start looking. Likewise, is there some template or standard way of asking him/her to stop? I've tried reporting it as spam but it seems more complicated to do that than I thought. (It takes me all my time to find the four thing you need to sign a post with!) Thanks in advance for any help. OldSquiffyBat (talk) 13:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check in at the Spam project - Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam or here - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam and these editors should help you - Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/Participants...Modernist (talk) 13:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've done that and someone else has sorted out my mess. There are an awful lot of templates and bits of code and so on to understand and I'm afraid I don't. Anyway, it is now being looked at. It seems as though you were already aware of this problem. I'll leave it up to you and others from now on! OldSquiffyBat (talk) 13:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cezanne

Just an observation - I'm surprised to find so many red-links in the Cezanne section of the "Big Two-Hearted River". They're quite beautiful paintings. Btw - thanks for the advice of taking it slowly. It was helpful. Truthkeeper (talk) 03:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess those red links should have images one of these days, glad to help by the way...Modernist (talk) 03:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

I deleted the talk page for that article because it was idiotic garbage. You're free to create a genuine talk page if you like. DS (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had starred writing out

a new intro and definition for the Sculpture article but bailed out after loosing the discussion surrounding all the sculptors listed in the Materials of sculpture through history section. I more or less decided to stop editing that article because how I saw things did not seem to be what the other editors involved saw. However I will take a look at the discussion and see what thoughts come to mind. Then see what come to paper, as it were. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, your input is greatly appreciated...Modernist (talk) 17:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

Sent you an email re Sculpture... Lithoderm 18:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never got it...Modernist (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Odd. I've just tried again. The gist was that based on what other encyclopedias seem to do (ie, the Grove), I think we should focus more on philosophical and aesthetic aspects rather than trying to create an international history based around a medium (the style of which will have more to do with other art from the same time and region than any sort of international tradition of sculpture). We could pare down an international outline based on general trends, without having it degenerate into a list of names. I strongly disagree with the proposal to increase focus on European sculpture because other cultures 3d productions are somehow seen as "not art". Regardless of the ritual intentions of, say, African masks, the institution of the museum makes it "art", as far as historiography is concerned. Should we exclude Altarpieces from being "art" because they were made not to hang in museums but for a ritual / religious purpose? Anyway, I've emailed you a copy of the Grove article (in case you don't have access to it) - so you can get an idea of the sort of approach I would favor. Lithoderm 20:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I still haven't got it, strange...Modernist (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My address is still the same - its weird...Modernist (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Color TOC

We now have {{List TOC}}, it would be great if you could comment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 March 1#Template:ColorTOC. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:33, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue One - Recent news from the Teahouse

Hi! Welcome to the first edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Metrics are out from week one. Week one showed that the need for Teahouse hosts to invite new editors to the Teahouse is urgent for this pilot period. It also showed that emailing new users invitations is a powerful tool, with new editors responding more to emails than to talk page templates. We also learned that the customized database reports created for the Teahouse have the highest return rate of participation by invitees. Check out the metrics here and see how you can help with inviting in our Invitation Guide.
A refreshed "Your hosts" page encourages experienced Wikipedians to learn about the Teahouse and participate. With community input, the Teahouse has updated the Your hosts page which details the host roles within the Teahouse pilot and the importance that hosts play in providing a friendly, special experience not always found on other welcome/help spaces on Wikipedia. It also explains how Teahouse hosts are important regarding metrics reporting during this pilot. Are you an experienced editor who wants to help out? Take a look at the new page today and start learning about the hosts tasks and how you can participate!
Introduce yourself and meet new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. New & experienced editors to Wikipedia can add a brief infobox about themselves and get to know one another with direct links to userpages. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, they'll surely be happy to feel the wikilove!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Drobychevskaja

Hello, you have added some notes to my article. Could you help me to improve the needed quality by giving me some examples what I should put in? Thank you in advance for your efford. --Stw 001 (talk) 21:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have added some references. Could you check please if I am on the right way? I worked through the most staff what you gave me to read. It would be nice if you could give me some response. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stw 001 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Two

Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Teahouse celebrates one month of being open! This first month has drawn a lot of community interest to the Teahouse. Hosts & community members have been working with the project team to improve the project in many ways including creating scripts to make inviting easier, exploring mediation processes for troubling guests, and best practices regarding mentoring for new editors who visit the Teahouse.

First month metrics report an average of 30 new editors visiting the Teahouse each week. Approximately 30 new editors participate in the Teahouse each week, by way of asking questions and making guest profiles. An average of six new questions and four new profiles are made each day. We'd love to hear your ideas about how we can spread the word about the Teahouse to more new editors.
Teahouse has many regulars. Like any great teahouse, our Teahouse has a 61% return rate of guests, who come back to ask additional questions and to also help answer others' questions. Return guests cite the speedy response rate of hosts and the friendly, easy to understand responses by the hosts and other participants as the main reasons for coming back for another cup o' tea!
Early metrics on retention. It's still too early to draw conclusions about the Teahouse's impact on new editor retention, but, early data shows that 38% of new editors who participate at the Teahouse are still actively editing Wikipedia 2-4 weeks later, this is compared with 7% from a control group of uninvited new editors who showed similar first day editing activity. Additional metrics can be found on the Teahouse metrics page.
Nine new hosts welcomed to the Teahouse. Nine new hosts have been welcomed to the Teahouse during month one: Chicocvenancio, Cullen328, Hallows AG, Jeffwang, Mono, Tony1, Worm That Turned, Writ Keeper, and Nathan2055. Welcome to the Teahouse gang, folks!
Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is a really nice way to make new editors feel welcome.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. -- Sarah (talk) 21:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ezra

Hello, Modernist. 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) 07:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh

Tell me about it, who knows how many sleepers there are out there. Looks like he's taken to stalking my userpage too! I appreciate someone with your knowledge in the field lending your opinion to the case. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 20:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep an eye out...Modernist (talk) 21:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not one of ours :). Presumably he got that image Rob uploaded from the link Rob to it Rob posted on the Talk Page in question. No idea who he is.

I like you Modernist and I like your work, both in Wikipedia and what I happen to know of it in real life. I wish you well. LHirsig (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am trying to do my best...Modernist (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
- Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
- If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 20:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to Wiki-Gangs of New York @ NYPL on April 21!

Wiki-Gangs of New York: April 21 at the New York Public Library

Join us for an an civic edit-a-thon, Wikipedia meet-up and instructional workshop that will be held this weekend on Saturday, April 21, at the New York Public Library Main Branch.

Venue: Stephen A. Schwarzman Building (NYPL Main Branch), Margaret Liebman Berger Forum (Room 227).
Directions: Fifth Avenue at 42nd Street.
Time: 11 a.m. - 5 p.m. (drop-ins welcome at any time)

The event's goal will be to improve Wikipedia articles and content related to the neighborhoods and history of New York City - No special wiki knowledge is required!

Also, please RSVP!--Pharos (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks Modernist, for reading, finding the inconsistencies, and supporting Bal des Ardents at FAC. Been a long road on that one. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, good job TK...Modernist (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Literary Barnstar
		For Ernest Hemingway, Romanticism, the List of years in poetry, and the List of years in literature. Those lists have definitely found a new editor in yours truly. INeverCry 21:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated, thank you...Modernist (talk) 21:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting

Hello Modernist--I hope you don't mind my visiting; I'm actually a post-structuralist but I hope we can set those differences aside for the moment. I saw you had taken an interest in User:RobvanderWaal. They're a sock of Rinpoche, it seems (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rinpoche/Archive), and I personally don't really care a whole lot, but I am going to ask whether the indef-block needs to be turned into a ban if only to keep a bunch of silliness at bay (not on the sock/master's part, I might add--just overzealous editors). Anyway, I found a draft of an article in the subpages of another now-blocked sock: see User:AnotherWeeWilly/sandbox. I'm wondering what to do with it; I don't think it should go in the trash just because it was written by someone we apparently don't like. Please tell me what you think--whether this should go in the mainspace or not. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modernist, please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#To_ban_or_not_to_ban.3F. It comes with art. Drmies (talk) 15:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Partial reversion of vandalism

I know it's easy to miss earlier vandalism when vandals hit one after the other, but when you reverted the vandalism by 68.7.148.20 (talk · contribs) at Timeline of United States history (1950–1969), you reverted to the vandalized version left by 208.104.205.55 (talk · contribs). -- Donald Albury 16:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff like that make it all the more difficult. Thanks...Modernist (talk) 21:03, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Good to bump into you in virtual land. Cheers, JNW (talk) 01:47, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yup...Modernist (talk) 02:13, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Hi! I saw you've posted your opinion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Murasaki Shikibu/archive1. Now I found the lead image was inappropriate, but Truthkeeper does not agree with me. It would be grateful if you could post your comment at Talk:Murasaki Shikibu#Wrong picture. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 08:52, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I was told this was canvassing. I posted RFC at WT:FAC#RFC on Murasaki Shikibu. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 16:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I responded there anyway...Modernist (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About Carlos Casagemas

Hi Modernist, and thanks for the pic and ref for that article. I'd go ahead and add translations from the other wikipedias, but they mostly appear to cite books without citing ISBNs, or other citation problems that are unacceptable on en.wp. Different wikipedias, different rules. Reason I started the article was because I found YouTube videos of The Shock of the New. The series might possibly have not been broadcasted in Australia, or maybe it was shown after my bed-time. Nevertheless, as a kid, the book of The Shock of the New was... well, our Art teacher only let one student take the book home to read, but I can only speculate on her reasons for this. --Shirt58 (talk) 12:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shirt58 - I am pleased that you started the article - long overdue. Try to add what you can; if you can find worthwhile material - well done...Modernist (talk) 13:02, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: TK

You are very welcome - have been busy IRL and not around much, so I missed the earlier comment (which makes a bit more sense of the whole Stephen King header). Thanks for the diff, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fanny Imlay for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fanny Imlay 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/Fanny Imlay 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 template from the top of the article. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 14:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP Visual Arts in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Visual Arts for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vollard Suite

Hi! Very welcome new article by someone else. Can you ask MOMA if they have the full set (and can help with other museums that do)? Only 30-something shown on their database. Now we need some fair-use pics. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 18:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys. I added an individual collector, I am sure there are many more, it fascinates me so. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 18:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey

Teahouse logo

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Problems with license

Hello Modernist. I hope you could be helping me with this problem. I have just uploaded a screenshot photo to Wikimedia Commons. I screenshot it from the game Age of Empires II: The Conquerors, and I also mentioned the producers – Ensemble Studios and Microsoft Game Studios – but it still went "illegal". Here is the picture:

File:Yucatan map. AoE2.png

AoE2

. What could I do to "legalize" it? If you can't help, do you know someone that can help me? Thanks.

- User:Jarhaugin 24 May 2012. 10:58 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarhaugin (talk • contribs) 08:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further discussion

Talk:Roy_Lichtenstein#Images

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Roy_Lichtenstein#Images. I am not sure if you are following his talk, so I notified you directly. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see this group of edits?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and I think you should re-add what you think belongs...Modernist (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FA invitation

P.S. would you be interested in collaborating on a Lichtenstein FA, while I have a bunch of Roy Lichtenstein and Pop art books checked out from the library. I could not tackle his bio by myself at FAC and am not a good enough art student to really want to take any painting to FA by myself.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:37, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite, I'll keep it in mind; but it's not my priority...Modernist (talk) 18:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

O.K., but in the future (once I have returned the books), the invitation is only for the works. I hope to be able to get a dozen or so up to GA level by myself this summer.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it Tony, I'm sure having the show at the Chicago Art Institute will be an inspiration...Modernist (talk) 20:01, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brushstrokes series images

Assuming a 4-FU-artwork WP:NFCC limit, should I include the comics source from which the Brushstrokes series was loosely adapted as the fourth image or should I leave a 2nd brushstrokes painting?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they should be included in the biography. I think the comic source imagery should be included in the individual articles about the paintings, great job Tony with the Brushstrokes series...Modernist (talk) 16:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I meant should it be the fourth inmage at Brushstrokes series?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it'll work well in that article...Modernist (talk) 23:42, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you endorse the car, which FU image should we remove? Let's discuss on the talk.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for !voting

	at my successful RFA
	Thank you, Modernist, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!..Modernist (talk) 17:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Conceptual art

Hi there. Can I ask a quick question about this diff: [8]. You say that we need a reference in English. Are you sure that this is correct? I thought that a reliable source could be in any language and that English is only preferable for ease of verification. Is it that you feel that the specific phrase "living art museum" can't be substantiated unless translated into English by the RS itself? Google Translate seems to support the translation, although I know this is not always foolproof. Maybe it is worth have another quick look at it? --DanielRigal (talk) 15:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel, when I tried Google I didn't have any luck, consequently my rvt and comment. Thanks for your input - if you did get a reasonable translation then I'll return the link...Modernist (talk) 17:41, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

Special report: WikiWomenCamp: From women, for women

News and notes: Editors want most funding for technical areas, while widespread ignorance of WMF board elections and chapters persists; voting still live on Commons best picture

Discussion report: Watching Wikipedia change

WikiProject report: Views of WikiProject Visual Arts

Featured content: On the lochs

Arbitration report: Two motions for procedural reform, three open cases, Rich Farmbrough risks block and ban

Technology report: Report from the Berlin Hackathon

Map (painting)

Please check out a new article on the painting by Jasper Johns that I initiated with the title Map (painting). Tell me if it needs any work, please. Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 03:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good start, I made a minor change and I added a Fair Use Rationale here: File:Jasper Johns's 'Map', 1961.jpg, well done...Modernist (talk) 03:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Am I justified in saying that "At least one other employs encaustic in place of oil paint" based upon this source describing a "Map" painting executed in encaustic? Do you know if Jasper Johns made ~~flag~~ map paintings in encaustic? Bus stop (talk) 15:29, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are others, here: [9] and here also: [10] and probably others...Modernist (talk) 17:19, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, and thanks for overlooking that I typed "flag paintings" instead of "map paintings". Bus stop (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification

WikiThanks

I have mentioned you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Evidence#Reply to questions by Fæ. If you wish to comment please take note of the guidelines at the top of the page and either the same page or Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Workshop may be suitable. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 09:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC) Fæ (talk) 09:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper Johns

Can we get a picture of Jasper Johns in the Jasper Johns article? This one is great, at the PBS website. Do we already have a picture of Jasper Johns somewhere on Wikipedia? There are also many photographs of Jasper Johns receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama in 2011. I think the photo at the PBS website is special. Bus stop (talk) 12:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen any images of Johns on wikipedia yet - here's a good source: [11]...Modernist (talk) 12:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From that web site I would pick the photograph of Leo Castelli seated with Jasper Johns standing behind him. Bus stop (talk) 14:02, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good choice, you can add it to Castelli's article...Modernist (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Both articles, right? Bus stop (talk) 14:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...Modernist (talk) 14:12, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What would be its copyright status? Bus stop (talk) 14:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not PD - probably the copyright belongs to the photographer...Modernist (talk) 14:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I located this. Is that Willem de Kooning in the photograph on the left? Bus stop (talk) 15:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's Bill de Kooning on the left...Modernist (talk) 17:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi there. Regarding this edit, I was wondering what your rationale is? The manual of style on images clearly states that text in an article should not be sandwiched between two images/an image and an infobox or similar, in the way your edit reintroduces. I know from past interaction with you that you're a reasonable guy and so I wanted to talk about it rather than just revert like a loon. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 03:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On my computer the images look better as they are now. I have worked on hundreds of visual arts articles and I know what I'm doing - here is a link to the painting in the museum by the way [12], I was surprised myself many months ago when I saw this title...Modernist (talk) 03:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Placing imagery can be complicated and in an article like that - the format seemed to work...Modernist (talk) 03:57, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I placed them in the gallery - seems ok; let me know if you have any other suggestions...Modernist (talk) 04:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look. On my screen the lede area looked cluttered the way it was before. I know such things are subjective and so I didn't want to make a massive issue out of it, but I think its current state is probably more compliant with the manual of style. As for the image title, perhaps Sorrowful Old Man could be bracketed instead of At Eternity's Gate? Seems to make sense to use the more common name as the primary, though this is completely subjective and I defer to your expertise should you disagree. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 04:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't disagree with that suggestion, since the museum has it that way, I think we should let it be...Modernist (talk) 04:28, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Four

Hi! Welcome to the fourth issue of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter for the Teahouse!

Teahouse pilot wraps up after 13 weeks After being piloted on English Wikipedia starting in February, the Teahouse wrapped up its pilot period on May 27, 2012. We expect this is just the beginning for the Teahouse and hope the project will continue to grow in the months to come!

Thank you and congratulations to all of the community members who participated - and continue to participate!

What you've all been waiting for: Teahouse Pilot Report is released! We look forward to your feedback on the methodology and outcomes of this pilot project.
....and if a pilot report wasn't enough, the Teahouse Pilot Metrics Report is out too! Dive into the numbers and survey results to learn about the impact the Teahouse has made on English Wikipedia.
Teahouse shows positive impact on new editor retention and engagement

409 new editors participated during the entire pilot period, with about 40 new editors participating in the Teahouse per week.
Two weeks after participating, 33% of Teahouse guests are still active on Wikipedia, as opposed to 11% of a similar control group.
New editors who participated in the Teahouse edit 10x the number of articles, make 7x more global edits, and 2x as much of their content survives on Wikipedia compared to the control group.

Women participate in the Teahouse 28% of Teahouse participants were women, up from 9% of editors on Wikipedia in general, good news for this project which aimed to have impact on the gender gap too - but still lots to be done here!
New opportunities await for the Teahouse in phase two as the Teahouse team and Wikipedia community examine ways to improve, scale, and sustain the project. Opportunities for future work include:

Automating or semi-automating systems such as invites, metrics and archiving
Experimenting with more ways for new editors to discover the Teahouse
Building out the social and peer-to-peer aspects further, including exploring ways to make answering questions easier, creating more ways for new editors to help each other and for all participants to acknowledge each other's efforts
Growing volunteer capacity, continuing to transfer Teahouse administration tasks to volunteers whenever possible, and looking for new ways to make maintenance and participation easier for everyone.

Want to know how you can lend a hand at the Teahouse? Become a host! Learn more about what makes the Teahouse different than other help spaces on Wikipedia and see how you can help new editors by visiting here.
Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is really encouraging to new Wikipedians.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 16:46, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery at Robert Louis Stevenson

The reason I changed the gallery to use the default setting is very simple -- setting 4 images per row and 150px is fine for users with screens around 1,000px wide, but not good for many others. A user on a mobile device may find 150px to be inconveniently large -- they may have set their default to 100px or even smaller. Those of us with large screens or multiple monitors will see a lot of white space to the right. If size and perrow are allowed to default, then they can see the images in one row, or, if they choose, in a larger thumb size which they might prefer. This is especially important for users with less than perfect vision. By fixing the size you require them to click on each image in order to see it at all; by allowing the size to default to their choice, you allow them to see the gallery in a size that is convenient for them without having to reload every image. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 11:42, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, thanks for your input...Modernist (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images

User:George Ho has been hassling me about images all over WP. Thanks for reverting Roy Lichtenstein. At Brushstrokes series he took one out and I put a different one back. What do you think.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:16, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Visual art needs to be seen; those wars have been waged; let's not overdue but the paintings have to be seen...Modernist (talk) 23:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Hard Worker Barnstar

		The Hard Worker Barnstar
		I am happy to award this special barnstar to you on the occasion of your six year Wikiversary. You've always been the person who most frequently shows up on my watchlist; thanks for all of your hard work improving and maintaining Wikipedia's art articles! Your contributions are very valuable and are much appreciated! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice surprise, thank you - especially from you, I appreciate your work so much; sometimes I think I'm running on empty these days...Modernist (talk) 03:56, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Brushstrokes series

Did you have an opinion of the merge discussion at Talk:Brushstrokes series?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:18, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Modernist. You have new messages at The Bushranger's talk page.
Message added 21:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Connecticut Women's Hall of Fame

Please leave the red in there. I'm reversing it. I'm proofing an article by that name, so the red will take care of itself when I get through. That was the whole idea of doing the template. Thanks for helping out. Maile66 (talk) 22:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done...Modernist (talk) 22:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi^{t | c} 17:25, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Bacon

thanks for reverting, the English Wikipedia had an image of the philosopher under exactly the same filename as the one in commons that i was trying to call. i've got the filename for the one in commons changed Tom B (talk) 19:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol I thought something was amiss...Modernist (talk) 19:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking out here Modernist. How is all with you, it been a while. Ceoil (talk) 23:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been very busy in real time; doing my best to continue here, but my time is constantly challenged by so many things to do...Modernist (talk) 23:37, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very busy in a good way I hope? Ceoil (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Totally, all good - well - mostly all good...Modernist (talk) 23:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thats life, good and bad, it all comes at the same time. Hey I was watching Guerrilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst last night, didnt know what to make of it. The editorial voice was very ambivalent, its a complex, multi-layered story. But facinating for sure; the SLA guys were certainly very bright and self aware, all though you coundnt condone, its an interesting insight. Ceoil (talk) 00:13, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

You have been awarded the seldom coveted THUMBS UP AWARD for your constant vigilance and in particular for your endeavors to keep wikipedia commercial free. The forces of darkness are relentless and it is only through the efforts of stalwarts such as you that the barbarians are being kept outside the gates. Carptrash (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated, thank you...Modernist (talk) 21:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. With the qualification I dont care so much about the reverts; you are a really nice, zen, guy to be around, and thanks for learning me about Odetta. Ceoil (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ceoil, lately my computer hasn't been too steady - tomorrow I'll take it in to the fix it shop. I'm hoping they'll be able to repair it quickly and it'll be fine late tomorrow. For now I'll keep it on for a while longer, a couple of hours. You know everyone was introduced to Odetta by Harry Belafonte back in 1959. Belafonte sings a mean Danny Boy [13]...Modernist (talk) 22:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I already know that story, I remember, and just saying pls feel free to drop links on my talk when ever the fancy takes you. I'm serious like that, maybe more than is usual, will listen carefully to them all. This is amusing me today [14], and as always this [15]. Ceoil (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Music was great - apropos the day especially, and the other very silly. He also gave us her around the same time [16], [17] and another [18] and this[19]...Modernist (talk) 23:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TriBeCa Move Discussion

When you said "I prefer the former", did you mean to support the proposal to move it back to its former title of "TriBeCa"? p b p 01:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...Modernist (talk) 11:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Bublé

Hi there. I am just curious as to why you won't allow Walter Bublé on the list of notable alumni of the Art Students League of New York? I recognize your expertise so I'm just looking for some feedback. Just so you know where I was coming from on this, I was trying to help clean up wikipedia and deal with an orphaned page, and I thought his contributions to the Fireman Museum in Hudson, NY would make him notable. Again, just looking for feedback for future work. Thanks! Rjp422 (talk) 18:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Basically it's a list of notable artists with a very few exceptions. There have been tens of thousands of alumni from the Art Students League and we cannot list all of them. Thank you for your question...Modernist (talk) 22:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Following up on your revert, I have nominated the subject page itself for deletion. Would benefit from your support per the same notability logic, please see the AfD request. Shorn again (talk) 01:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Five

Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Guest activity increased in July. Questions are up from an average of 36 per week in June to 43 per week in July, and guest profile creation has also increased. This is likely a result of the automatic invite experiments we started near the end of month, which seeks to lessen the burden on hosts and other volunteers who manually invite editors. During the last week of July, questions doubled in the Teahouse! (But don't let that deter you from inviting editors to the Teahouse, please, there are still lots of new editors who haven't found Teahouse yet.)
More Teahouse hosts than ever. We had 12 new hosts sign up to participate at the Teahouse! We now have 35 hosts volunteering at the Teahouse. Feel free to stop by and see them all here.
Phase two update: Host sprint. In August, the Teahouse team plans to improve the host experience by developing a simpler new-host creation process, a better way of surfacing active hosts, and a host lounge renovation. Take a look at the plan and weigh in here.
New Teahouse guest barnstar is awarded to first recipient: Charlie Inks. Using the Teahouse barnstar designed by Heatherawalls, hosts hajatvrc and Ryan Vesey created the new Teahouse Guest Barnstar. The first recipient is Charlie Inks, for her boldness in asking questions at the Teahouse. Check out the award in action here.
Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania! The Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania this past month, where editor retention and interface design was heavily discussed. Sarah and Jonathan presented the Teahouse during the Wikimedia Fellowships panel. Slides can be viewed here. A lunch was also held at Wikimania for Teahouse hosts.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 08:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Works of Reginald Hallward

Hi Modernist, It's been a very long time since we chatted - I hope everything is going well for you.

I've been doing some copyediting of the Works of Reginald Hallward article - which was written to include primarily his work with stained glass. He's also done a fair amount of work as a poet, publisher and painter (not all of which is yet in the article). Do you know who might be able to sort out whether the Works of Reginald Hallward article should be expanded to include all works - or possibly renamed to something like Works of Reginald Hallward (glassmaking)?

I started the discussion on Talk:Works of Reginald Hallward.

Thanks so much!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific work Carole, my pleasure...Modernist (talk) 02:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for weighing in. I've finished the changes and the works article makes an impressive statement now. Great idea!--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:07, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HA Schult

As you seem to have much experience in writing articles on modern art, may I ask you for a third opinion on Talk:HA Schult? There is a content dispute on HA Schult. One editor frequently removes what I have written, although I think that all was well sourced. Here are some diffs: [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] Wikiwiserick (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look, but at first glance it seems like a legitimate dispute from both sides, each has valid points...Modernist (talk) 20:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks in anticipation. You may compare this version of the article with the current one. Wikiwiserick (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the current version...Modernist (talk) 11:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

~~Hello~~ Hi, I'm Drmies. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Mandarax that didn't seem very civil, so it has been ~~removed~~ commented on in a patronizing manner. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, See section "Incorrect template warnings". Drmies (talk) 22:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well done - what a hoot - who made those improvements, wow...Modernist (talk) 03:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich

Thanks for looking after this, I was slow to wade in given my, eh tendancy to escalate. Its give an inch and accept a mile, and there seemed no surrender there. Tks also for the Dylan links, always welcome; this from a very troubled guy, espically later, but one whoes heart if not brain was I think always very much in the right place. My best as always my friend. Ceoil (talk) 23:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ceoil - that track is from his new album due out next month...Modernist (talk) 23:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

close associates, socking, self-promotion etc.

Hi, Modernist. I noted your reverts on Johnny Otto etc. I'm pretty sure this equals this equals this equals this. And -- surprise, surprise -- there's a link to here from here. The user also appears to be preparing a self-promoting autobiography.

My feeling is that the article Johnny Otto is spam but its subject may be marginally notable. Art squat is WP:CSD#A7 and its appended references have nothing to do with the "movement" described in the body of the article; it is also COI spam by a close associate. Likewise, this should be speedied either A7 or G11 once she attempts to go live with it.

Sound reasonable? -- Rrburke (talk) 23:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, neither article is notable and both are non-encyclopedic and the summertime attracts this stuff...Modernist (talk) 23:49, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night in paintings

Hi Modernist, Do you want to work on Night in paintings together - or did you just want to add an image or two?

It seems like a very interesting topic with many types of themes and meanings. I like it!--CaroleHenson (talk) 12:47, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carole - I'll keep an eye out and add a few things if I can...Modernist (talk) 13:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your input!! If you have a chance to take a look at the Night in paintings#Bibliography of potential sources and let me know your initial thoughts: seem to be going in the right direction? Anything jump out as particularly good - or particularly unsuitable? Any other thoughts? That would be great!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good work Carole, I like your adds a lot...Modernist (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, great! Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for formatting the image captions! Looks great! I'm going to take a bit of a break from Night in Paintings to work on something else - and will come back and start working on content in a bit.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A cookie for you!

Hello! Nice to meet you! Thank you for contributing in the night in paintings article! :D RexRowan Talk 14:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ty...Modernist (talk) 14:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

For the quick fix of the Night in paintings article Itemirus^{Message me!} 14:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shall I stop?..Modernist (talk) 14:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ty...Modernist (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night in paintings - a couple of questions

Hi,

Great work on the images! They look great!

I pulled over some info about the "famous examples" and the info for the Hopper painting appears (before some minor editing I did) to be a cut-and-paste from this site: painting-reproductions. I don't see a copyright message on the site, though, would that mean that we're free to use as written? Or, more likely, did I miss something?
I wasn't thinking that anything needed to be written for "famous painters" - is that what you're thinking?
My next step after finding missing info for the "famous paintings" is to start working on the background info about the significance of night in paintings.

Would you please help with #1 and 2? Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:31, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think my second question was a silly one. As I started reading up - it's the artists that tell the story about the evolution of painting night scenes. So, I've restructured things - while keeping the nice right hand border the best I can. I hope this makes sense.--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carole - re question 1 - It looks to me as though the link copies the wikipedia article and not vice-versa, so don't worry about it. Good job - it's an enjoyable project with lots of possibilities...Modernist (talk) 11:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Fine Arts
		For your generous contribution in night in paintings RexRowan Talk 09:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...Modernist (talk) 23:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night in paintings - talk back

Hello, Modernist. You have new messages at User:CaroleHenson.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Munch

Hi Modernist, remembering that we worked very well together in the past, wondering if you'd be interested in another collab. I sure could use your help there, though Im not sure how you think of Munch. Ceoil (talk) 12:16, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check it out...Modernist (talk) 12:36, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night in paintings (Western art)

Hi Modernist, It's been nice working with you again!

I finished my first section on the article - at least I'm checking in to see if it looks good to go. JohnBod had said that I had too much background information and that I should focus on whether the works are truly night (versus always night in hell, for instance) and the depiction of the light sources in the work. Well, that's my summary anyway.

I won't bother you for all sections, but just to see if I'm on the right track, do you mind looking at Night in paintings (Western art)#14th century and letting me know if it coherently and fully (for this article) discusses the impact of "Night in paintings"? It would be so appreciated!--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The writing looks too tentative, keep at it. I think we need some more information there..Modernist (talk) 23:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll take a look at it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:17, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, were you ever right! It's so much stronger with more info!

Are you intending that I write about each of the paintings inserted into the 14th century section?--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:06, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just filling in some holes, write whatever you want about the 14th century - Cimabue, Giotto, frescoes, religion etc...Modernist (talk) 00:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I probably will leave it at 4 per 14 and 15 if I can; and I'd like to find one more 16th and two more great 18th century images and that's it...Modernist (talk) 00:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll see what I can find about the others, but make Gaddi's fresco the highpoint.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:16, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nights - sources

Hi Modernist!

I've been having trouble finding sources that go into much night/light/illumination analysis of the 14th century paintings in Night in paintings (Western art). I've been looking in books and on the web - but is there somewhere specifically I could look?

It would seem that I could not use this artble article because it seems that it's encyclopedic content, but is this a site that WP guidelines says is ok?

Otherwise, since I'm not finding reliables, I think I'll just move on to the 15th century.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:39, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carole - the best that I can figure would be to focus on the individuals. The topic is 50 miles wide and it's going to be individual interpretations of darkness, night, light sources, subject matter and editorial meaning, in individual paintings and artists that will yield the best analyses...Modernist (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm, ok. I'm guessing there's no suggestions regarding sources and I should not use artble as a source. So, I'll move on to the 15th century. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Western night - intro

Hi, Thanks so much for adding more to the intro. It's become so informative, I thought it might be good to put it in an overview section. Whatever you think.

Sorry if I stepped on your toes - I haven't checked the western article in a bit and just now realized you just made the edits. I'll back off - make a bit more headway on the eastern article - and then get started on the 16th century. I had been kind of waiting around to see if there were any comments, suggestions or edits to 14th and 15th, but it doesn't look like it.

I bet your comments to the intro will guide me to do a better job searching for the right info, too.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Its fine Carole - I'm just trying to lighten your load a little. It can be in the intro or that section is ok. Needs a little more on the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries...Modernist (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks! I appreciate that - your content is really good for setting context and giving a wonderful overview - so that people can delve in where they may be most interested without having to read the entire article. Good job!

I'm not so sure how to take silence in the Visual arts project space, such as to my question that I posted on the project page about any comments, etc. regarding the Western article. Is silence golden?--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should keep discussing specifics as you can...Modernist (talk) 01:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something you have in mind that I should be bringing up?--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping me out with this - I see you're on a wiki-break - so your time is appreciated!--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Found object

Hi. Would WP:COPYRIGHT prohibit me from typing up some paragraphs from the book "ArtSpeak" by Robert Atkins and posting them on the Talk page of the article Found object? Obviously this would not be permissible in article space, but I am just thinking it would help other editors to write/improve the article if it were available on that article's Talk page, or on a Subpage, for instance a User's Subpage. Please see the discussion here. Also please feel free to weigh in with an opinion or offer advice, if you feel so-inclined. Bus stop (talk) 14:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved!

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lost in a rabbit hole

Hi, I think I got myself lost in a huge rabbit hole. After I did clean-up on Nocturne (painting), split out American specific content to Nocturne (American paintings), it's now seeming to me that there's a significant tie to Tonalism - and "nocturne" might just be a random naming convention or poetic idea about the works - not really a movement in and of itself. It also doesn't seem to go back to Rembrandt as was in the article, except as a form of inspiration. Well, that's the way it seems since "Whistler" coined the phrase nocturne for a specific type of art work.

The article has a list of artists, but I found their names on a list of Tonalists at AskArt - no list anywhere that I can find of a painters who make nocturnes.

I'm happy to clean-up what I've done, but could you just set me on the right path? I saw that you worked quite a bit on the Tonalism article, so I thought - Perfect, he'll help me get out of this rabbit hole.

What should I do? Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 10:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm basically confused here Tonalism is a name attached to a group of 19th century American painters - somewhat related to American Impressionism, Nocturnes is a phrase Whistler used to describe a group of his paintings....why try to make a big deal out of that? What's the point of making new groups of paintings, why bother?...Modernist (talk) 17:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is (as in music, which came first) essentially a "random naming convention" from the 19th century only, & I'd merge & redirect both these to the main Western night painting article, cutting most of the main text, which is just waffle. Johnbod (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree...Modernist (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, great! I got confused because I've been seeing the term "nocturne paintings" in the research for the night in paintings articles - and I got off track (yep, down a rabbit hole).

So, I blanked out the information that was moved to the Nocturne (American paintings) article and flagged it for deletion, removed most of the content from Nocturne (painting) - and wrote new, cited content about the use of the term broadly and more specifically by Whistler, for instance. It's now basically a stub with a few "See also"s. See what you think.

Thanks, guys!--CaroleHenson (talk)

Oops, missed the redirect part - see what you think.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys! Stalking around in the dark, your conversation got me curious... Presumably Whistler coined this French-language appellative in painting much in the way Field did in music? And Debussy's borrowing from Whistler [26] seems to be a plausible assumption rather than closely documented? Any thoughts? —MistyMorn (talk) 19:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, have you looked at the revised content at Nocturne (painting)?--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work Carole! I think the text is much clearer now. Btw, googling around (Books/Scholar) I was surprised how hard it was to trace any direct documentation of Debussy's borrowing. Though I suppose the question is largely academic, given the wealth of indirect evidence for the assumption. Well, that's my Debussy playlist sorted for the night... —MistyMorn (talk) 19:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final follow-up item: Is it good form to notify the original author of the article what's happened to it? Or, is that not needed? (I'd rather not ruffle feathers, but don't want to miss correct or polite protocol.)--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tweaked it a bit but that's much better. The original editor hasn't contributed since May [27], so I wouldn't worry about contacting. If an article seems to have main editors who are still around it is good to propose drastic changes on talk. Johnbod (talk) 19:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks all!--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:50, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nights - check in

Hi, I thought I'd check in with you about the Night in paintings (Western art). A couple of things:

I'm having a much easier time finding info for the eastern art article - and kind of had a lot of momentum going with someone so I've been spending most of my "night paintings" time on the Eastern article. And, it's been much easier to find info.
In the meantime, I have found some additional sources - but they're mostly just a bit of info here and a bit of info there - that are hard to work into any sort of great analysis or commentary. See User:CaroleHenson/Night in paintings (Western art) list. I will get back to it though.
One thing to ponder, though, is that the western article is pretty much limited to the best, most revered classical artists of Europe. Not so much about other influences. Is that because the term "Western art" is really limited pretty much to European art of specific movements - and not so much other works in the western world (native peoples, women, African Americans, etc. who have depicted night in paintings)?--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A little confused

Hi Modernist,

I'm a little confused, from the return of info to the Nocturne (painting) article it looks like you've changed your mind about what should be in the article. Which of course, is fine, but I spent a fair amount of at the beginning cleaning out what looked to be citations and really weren't - they were either links to photographs from unreliable sources or links to a main page somewhere. Virtually everything that had been in the original article was really unsourced.

I'm not too excited about doing the clean-up again - but I thought you might like to know that. You're always so good about making great articles!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion Carole, the original article was fine and is complimentary to the newer article, I'll check the refs...Modernist (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, cool! It's a guys prerogative to change his mind, too! ;) Go for it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinated by this, though I admit to feeling in the dark here. My own idle take might be to complement Nocturnes (Debussy) with a Nocturnes (Whistler). —MistyMorn (talk) 22:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expressionism spam

Dealt with via the spam blacklist. Seemed easiest. Black Kite (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC) <[reply]

Thanks - they were driving me a little crazy...Modernist (talk) 23:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A related discussion to this has appeared on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#"poArtExpressionism.com" external link. You may wish to take a look. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:55, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Six

Hi! Welcome to the sixth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Teahouse serves over 700 new editors in six months on Wikipedia! Since February 27, 741 new editors have participated at the Teahouse. The Q&A board and the guest intro pages are more active than ever.

A lovely little teahouse nestled in Germany from Wiki Loves Monuments

Automatic invites are doing the trick: 50% more new editors visiting each week. Ever since HostBot's automated invite trial phase began we've seen a boost in new editor participation. Automating a baseline set of invitations also allows Teahouse hosts to focus on serving hot cups of help to guests, instead of spending countless hours inviting.
Guests to the Teahouse continue to edit more & interact more with other community members than non-Teahouse guests according to six month metrics. Teahouse guests make more than twice the article edits and edit more talk pages than other new editors.
New host process implemented which encourages anyone to get started as a Teahouse host in a few easy steps. Stop by the hosts page and become a Teahouse host today!
Host lounge renovations nearing completion. Working closely with Teahouse hosts, we've made some major renovations to the Teahouse Host Lounge - the main hangout and resource space for hosts. Learn more about the improvements here.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. EdwardsBot (talk) 00:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More LG Williams stuff

You seem to be one of the few editors who edit art articles regularly and has some knowledge of the history of LG Williams-related articles on Wikipedia. Maybe you care to comment about the latest spat on ANI? I've left a note at WP:WPVA a while back, but nobody seems interested in wading into that issue. Tijfo098 (talk) 12:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modernist does excellent work, thank you for the request for expertise --Art4em (talk) 21:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the offer but I simply do not have the required information or the time to mediate this dispute, good luck to both sides...Modernist (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, this got resolved the way many wiki disputes do... behaviorally. Tijfo098 (talk) 18:48, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malevich

Hello,

I would like to create some articles about paintings by Malevich. Not very successful at the moment so perhaps you have offline sources or know where to find something like that. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sigmund Freud

Hello, Modernist. As you may be aware, there is currently a dispute over the contents of the section of the Sigmund Freud article dealing with Freud's scientific legacy. I appreciate that you may be busy, but if you could comment at the talk page, even briefly, it would be helpful. I'm asking you as you have edited the article from time to time. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 06:30, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look, but not today...Modernist (talk) 15:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your invite to participate in the discussion, I read through some of it - however I don't think I'm able to add anything useful; best of luck...Modernist (talk) 02:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ha!

It's funny that you just added a Chihuly at Sculpture because I just (4 minutes ago) emailed him (his studio) about getting permission to use a shot of some of his work that I had taken. You found a picture taken in England and beat me to it. I am still curious as to what the studio will say. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Timing, timing...Modernist (talk) 11:26, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS I never did hear back from them. Carptrash (talk) 15:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To say

Was saddened to read this. I know that the west coast has had several dramatic winters in a row and that its been tough, but hope you are ok and surviving. Your a very nice and considerate man and I hope the best for you. Ceoil (talk) 12:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's a most difficult year and a half...Modernist (talk) 12:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]