User talk:TwomblyArt

Welcome

Hi -- welcome to Wikipedia; it looks like you've made a few edits but nobody's said hello yet. I hope you enjoy editing here. If you have any questions about editing Wikipedia, please just leave me a note here or on my talk page.

I also wanted to let you know that I changed the Startling Stories article back to the way it was before you edited it. You removed a comment to the effect that Oscar Friend made it a juvenile magazine. The sources cited do support that, so I was wondering why you removed it -- do you have another source that disagrees with Ashley? I don't have a strong opinion about it myself: I have a complete run of the magazine but haven't read enough of them to form an opinion, but in any case I can't really cite my own opinion, I have to cite sources, and the sources generally agree on this.

By the way, are you connected in any way to Cy Twombly? I noticed the name and was curious. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To Mike Christie: Thank you for your nice welcome. I am not sure how to use the Talk page but I am responding, in kind, to you here (and below under Strange Stories). I have no stake in the Oscar Friend comment or suggestion of the magazine's relative appeal to certain age groups. The link to Friend and editors asking Bergey to change or alter the images is neither founded nor true; if I edited too much of the baby with the bath water, apologies—usually I consider myself detail oriented. I do disagree with the overall exceptionally black and white assessment of change in tone, either in story or art, associated with Friend. But that is nothing I wish to contend. At the same time, this article included a series of mistakes, which I kindly worked to correct, regarding the artists involved. They were not "in-house" artists. Earle K. Bergey did not begin his first covers in 1941; this date was wrong and I changed it. September 1940 and November 1940 are two examples of Bergey covers proving this original article in need of change. And the assertion that Bergey and/or Belarski (Rudolph was even spelled incorrectly) were asked by editors to "change" or water down their art to changing tastes is simply not born out by fact as comparison of images, cover to cover, can confirm. My concerns are to correct information presented on the artists involved; the license artists were given by this publication and its sister titles is something rare in the time and to be celebrated. Thank you again for your questions. I hope the factual corrections I have worked to make to the artist information are kept in tact. I'm simply trying to elevate the veracity and clarity of this discourse. Cheers.

I'm delighted to find someone interested in improving pulp sf magazine articles! I hope we can collaborate on improvements to more of these; I'm sure there's much that can be done to make them more accurate. I do have some comments, but let's wait for the discussion below about Strange Stories to conclude first. No hurry. By the way, you might like to know that when you're having a conversation with someone on a page like this, if you put four tildes (like this: ~~~~) after your comments, it will automatically add your name and date, so others know who is commenting. If you have any questions about Wikipedia, please do ask; I'd be glad to help. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Strange Stories

I just reverted your edits to Strange Stories; the material you removed was cited to a reliable source, and you gave no reason for removing it. If you still think it should be removed, please comment on the article's talk page and we can discuss it. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your attention and concerns. I have restored two changes related to the mention of artists Rudolph Belarski (not even spelled correctly in the original) and Earle K. Bergey; I will leave my changes to this matter, correcting what is false information (they were not in-house artists) and simply deleting unnecessarily subjective commentary of one individual on the artist's strength, quality of work, and appeal. Thank you.

Thanks for the response. You're right about the mis-spelling -- that was my error, not Weinberg's; sorry about that. Weinberg is definite that they were "brought in-house" (his words) by Standard to work on Standard's pulps and later on Popular Library covers. In a case like this we really have to rely on what the sources say, and Weinberg is a well-known writer on sf and fantasy artists. If he is mistaken about this, do you have a source that we can cite to say they were freelance?

Regarding his negative opinion of their work, I've asked another editor (who already reviewed the article) to comment here; let's see what they say. I am a fan of Bergey myself, but I couldn't find any comments about the quality of the art except this, and I felt obliged to include it as the only available critical commentary. Do you have any other reviews or commentary that we could mention instead of or in addition to Weinberg's comments? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The editor I asked about this has re-inserted the text you deleted in the body of the article, though not the lead, with the comment "it's an opinion that's properly attributed and sourced, and it's presented as an opinion rather than a fact; this is totally appropriate". Do you know of any articles or books that discuss Strange Stories that mention the art? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:43, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Artist signature

I saw your edit summary on Scientific Detective Monthly. I agree that you and I know perfectly well who an artist is once we see an artist's signature, but since that might be considered "original research", using our knowledge of the field rather than a checkable source, it's better to replace it with a citation to a reliable source that gives the same information where possible. I'm not going to revert your attribution of the artwork, but I don't think it's a good habit. For example, didn't Lawrence Stevens and his son Peter both sign their work the same way? And if I recall correctly, this wasn't known for some time, so older references are going to say a work is by the father when it's not. Going by the signature in that case would get the wrong answer. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Christie, how can I send you a response without it be seen by all? I spent time crafting words in response but they are intended for you in hopeful resolution to this matter.

Thanks for advising.

If you go to my user page, there should be a link on the left that says "Email this user"; click on that and you can send me an email. It will reveal whatever email address you're using, so make sure you're OK with that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:52, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]