User talk:Clubmarx

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Art and visual art techniques 2 Image copyrights 3 Conceptual art 4 Portal:Visual arts/Categories 5 Deletion Sorting for Visual arts 6 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 7 Unspecified source for Image:Jeffrey-sachs.jpg 8 I am sending this out to wikiart folks everywhere, 9 wikEd

[edit] Art and visual art techniques

I noticed you created the subcategory Category:Visual art techniques within Category:Artistic techniques. It seems like the visual art ones are of the same calibre as artistic techniques. Also, since Music is in Category:Arts not Category:Art it seems sufficient to the musical techniques categorized as music. I'd like to merge visual art tech. and art. tech. and take out music. tech - sound OK? Clubmarx 21:57, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for the note. Unfortunately I didn't understand it all. However, I am writing to ask you to please provide justification for not categorizing music as an art. Hyacinth 23:05, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Dance, theater, etc. are in the Performing arts, which is in the category the Arts, just as music is in the performing arts. No dance techniques or acting techniques are in artistic techniques, mostly just painting techniques. Things inside and outside the category Art can have artistic merit or have 'an art to it.' But the category 'Art' is being using somewhat syonymously with the fine arts, especially painting. I'm trying to clean all this up. Clubmarx 00:40, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

I appreciate efforts to clean up categories, especially since it takes a long time, but I oppose any efforts to categorize music, or any other art, outside of art. At this point I am not sure why there is both a category "Art" and "Arts". Regardless, category names should be self-explanitory (stand alone) and if "Art" is actually visual art it needs to be named such. Hyacinth 17:40, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Solipsist, has there been a decision made to move Category:Art into Category:Visual art or vice versa? I'm not sure what the outcome was on Category talk:Art. I have been working on cleaning up lots of these areas. There hasn't been a consensus to delete Category:Arts right? See User talk:Clubmarx for some problems I'm running into. Also, note, that Hyacinth is quoting himself above. help! Clubmarx 18:18, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

As far as I am aware no decision has been made. WP:CFD recently had a proposal to merge C:Art with C:Arts which was generally rejected, although there was a fair bit of support for changing the name of C:Arts to C:The Arts. Last time I looked, C:Art is the defacto category for most of the visual arts, and I think its heirarchy under the more general C:Arts (or C:The Arts) is about right. But there does seem to be a problem with the specific category names, so renaming C:Art and C:Visual Art might also help (though there is a slight problem that mainstream visual arts aren't necessarily so visual now they are straying into conceptual art and sound sculptures). I would suggest reopenning discussion on the two category talk pages, but it is not always easy to get people to offer an opinion. -- Solipsist 14:22, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyrights

Hi Clubmarx —

I notice you've tagged most of the images you've uploaded with {{GFDL}} or {{PD}}. However, I'm not sure that these tags apply. GFDL is only if the copyright holder of the image explicitly releases the work into GFDL, and PD is if the copyright holder either explicitly releases all copyrights or if the image has entered into the public domain, for example by being created before a certain date.

Did you take Image:Jeffrey-sachs.jpg, Image:Walter-ong.jpg, Image:Bibendumchair.jpg and Image:Eileen-gray-e1027-table.jpg? If not, and if you've no word from the copyright holders that they are releasing copyrights, these tags don't apply. You should look through Wikipedia:Image copyright tags to see which tags would be applicable (to see if an image is eligible for any of them, check Wikipedia:Image use policy). For instance, {{Promophoto}} might be applicable to the first image.

Let me know if you have any questions, thanks, — Asbestos | Talk 12:36, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

I did talk with the PR people at the Earth Institute (sachs) and the site for the two chairs and they granted permissions to use that photo. The photo was available on their site at the time. I believe that the Ong one is correct with {{Promophoto}}. Let me know if something needs to change. Clubmarx 03:41, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

I'll look at this a little more in-depth when I have a moment, but for now I can say that the images which are still tagged {{GFDL}} and {{PD}} probably aren't correctly tagged. If you didn't have explicit confirmation that the owners of the copyright specifically released the image into GFDL or the Public Domain, you'll have to use another license. {{Promophoto}} I'm sure is fine for Jeffrey Sachs, and one of the fair use tags probably for the chairs (depending on what kind of permission they gave). I may not be around much in the next couple of days, but I'll take a closer look soon. All the pictures I'm sure are fine, though, it's just getting the bureaucratic tags right... — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 10:55, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Conceptual art

Hi, both of us have our favourite subject as art! I see your point about Stuckism and normally I probably wouldn't have put in the link, but certainly in the UK they are such a publicly recognised voice against conceptual art (they're always getting quoted in the press), I thought it would be useful to have a hotline through to their site. Otherwise it means going to the Stuckism article and then finding an external link there, if anyone wants to follow it up. I didn't want to put a wikilink in the See Also section as that is covered in the article, but if there isn't an external link, maybe it should go there as the current wikilink is from an adjective (Stuckist) not even the name of the group. However, I'm not going to get into a fight about it, and now I've given my reasons, I'll leave it to you to do what you think is best. Tyrenius 03:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello - yes, good to see someone in the art category! I too don't want to get into a fight about this, but I'd like to remove. The journalist would need to be lazy not to look into the references and other links. There's a news story link and a reference link to stuckism.com. So many articles have many links and pages start to look like dmoz, thus my tendency to trim whenevery possible. Clubmarx | Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, misunderstanding there. My point is the general reader will have heard about this group through the press, not that journalists will be looking in wiki! I'm a little peturbed that a general point ("so many articles....") is being applied to this one, to which it doesn't apply as it doesn't have a lot of links; also that it now means the only "anti" external link is to a self-confessed humour site, while the Stuckists are nothing if not serious in their campaigns. However, although I don't agree, I will not actively oppose. Tyrenius 06:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Visual arts/Categories

Ham, I see you made the original version of this so I have a question for you. Why are Performing arts and Æsthetics(which is categorized only under philosophy) part of the visual arts categories? I already made an edit where I removed Literature. Can Performing arts and Æsthetics be removed as well? It looks like Portal:Arts/Categories already has this. Removing these would be more consistent with Arts. Thanks - Clubmarx | Talk 00:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry about that; the page is just a copy of the original version of Portal:Arts/Categories (back when it was still the Art Portal). I should have looked more closely at it before dumping the text wholesale. You're right, the performing arts and aesthetics do not belong. HAM 07:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• No problem. I thought I was missing something. :) I've removed them. Clubmarx | Talk 15:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion Sorting for Visual arts

Thanks for creating this page! I need some help with Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Visual_art. I'm not sure which page to put the sorting tag. I tried with Category:Art_supplies but it's not working. Do you have to manually add the item to the the visual art deletion sorting page? Clubmarx 18:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it seems items have to be put on the page manually at the moment. There is an idea for categories to do it automatically, but it hasn't reached that stage yet. You won't be able to put a Category that's up for deletion on it. You will have to put the page name as in {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of video artists}}, except it will be "Categories for deletion". I went to the Art Supplies category page and clicked on the link to get the deletion page, but I couldn't find it. I wonder if it's been listed properly?Tyrenius 00:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

OK thanks for the info. I don't know what happened with the link to the Art Supplies discussion. But I added a hard link on the category page as a workaround. Clubmarx 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

As items have to be added manually, it makes sense to just put on articles which someone wants to draw attention to. Tyrenius 01:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Note - "Category:Art supplies" has been merged into Category:Art materials, per CfD. Cheers! BDAbramson T 03:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Applied art Chris Burden City Racing Handicraft Communication Arts Joseph Stella Andy Goldsworthy Indian painting Literary merit Nam June Paik Paul Rand John Brack Umberto Boccioni Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design David Lee (art critic) Minneapolis College of Art and Design Luminism (American art style) Moore College of Art and Design Communication design

Cleanup College of Visual Arts Joseph Beuys Futurist Manifesto Merge Automotive design Scenographer Fashion design Add Sources Contrapposto High culture Ukiyo-e Wikify Chinese Super League 2004 Operation Ivy Bells Shlomo Moussaieff Expand De Stijl Giotto di Bondone Mfx

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 22:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Jeffrey-sachs.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Jeffrey-sachs.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Note that any unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peta 10:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I am sending this out to wikiart folks everywhere,

so please don't feel picked on. Here's my thing. I've been watching list of sculptors recently and have been weeding out the entries in red on the theory that this is an index of sculptors in wikipedia. However i have been reluctant to remove artists that I know or discover to be real, wikipedia worthy people, so am trying to decide if i should just do a stub - maybe a lot of stubs - of these folks or leave them on the list [I HATE lists with too much red - check out the List of Frank Lloyd Wright works for example.

For example, i checked out one, François-Joseph Duret (1804 - 1865) and discovered that there are at least two sculptors with that name, (1732 - 1816) and (1804 - 1865)- this one is the son - and both probably could comfortably be in wikipedia. I did have a rather bad moment recently when someone DELETED my article on Connor Barrett about an hour [maybe less] after I first posted it, on the theory that he was not wikiworthy [or something] and a lot of these fairly remote (in time and place from me) artists are a lot more obscure than Barrett. So, i would like to know that i have the support of the wikipedia art history community before doing this. Drop me a line, if you wish to sit down and be counted. Life is good, Carptrash 05:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. although i do mostly American art i have contributed to lots on non-American articles including Aleijadinho, Ásmundur Sveinsson, Einar Jonsson, Gunnfrídur Jónsdóttir, Henry Moore, Ivan Meštrović, Ørnulf Bast, Rayner Hoff, and probably some others. I say this because most of the stubs I'm proposing would be Europeans.

[edit] wikEd

Hi, I have seen that you are using the Cacycle editor extension. This program is no longer actively maintained in favor of its much more powerful successor wikEd.

wikEd has all the functionality of the old editor plus: • syntax highlighting • nifty image buttons • more fixing buttons • paste formatted text from Word or web pages • convert the formatted text into wikicode • adjust the font size • and much, much more.

Switching to wikEd is easy, check the detailed installation description on its project homepage. Often it is as simple as changing every occurrence of editor.js into wikEd.js on your User:YourUsername/monobook.js page.

Cacycle 22:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)