Talk:List of painters by name
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is related to the WikiProject Painting, an attempt to improve, organise and standardise Wikipedia's articles in the area of painting. For guidelines see the project page or the Contributing FAQ. You can discuss the project at its talk page or see a list of tasks to do here. |
Contents |
[edit] Layout
for easy of reference wouldn't this be a better layout?
Cézanne, Paul, (1839-1906), French artist
Singularity 20:34, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- Probably, but every list I've seen on Wiki is written first name first. I don't know why one is favored over the other, but apparently it is. I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to go through and reformat it. ;) --Etacar11 20:46, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- Actually this makes some sense. Many well-known artists are often refered to just by their surname, so it might help people find who they are looking for. The downside, as Etacar11 says, is that it would be quite painful to convert the list. And worse, since articles are listed 'firstname surname', it would be quite painful to keep reformating new entries. -- Solipsist 12:16, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
---
[edit] Rabo Karabekian?
Isn't this person entirely fictional? See Bluebeard (book); as far as I know there is no real historical person.
Perhaps the list under "Maine Painting" should go on a sepperate page?
Done, to List of Maine Painters. -- Infrogmation
---
Isn't it time this page broken up into separate pages by letter? BevRowe 17:44 Apr 3, 2003 (UTC)
Does anyone think that L. S. Lowry is famous enough to be put in the popular artists section of this article, as he is very famous in Britain. Or has no-one outside Britain ever heard of him? G-Man 30th apr 2003
I've given it a week and no-ones objected so I'll take that as a yes G-Man 6th may 03
- The "Shortcuts to highly popular painters:" , I presume, is for the names that would be the most accessed by users. If you think Lowery has a reputation in the league of Rembrant or Cezanne, then you'd think he belongs there. However please, why can't he be in alphabetical order like everyone else on the list? Wondering simply, -- Infrogmation 15:22 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
- And why isn't he on the main list? Certainly he should be on the main list if he deserves a spot on the short list as well. That's a bit much for me; I'm moving him from out of order on the short list to in order on the main list. -- Infrogmation 15:29 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
- could someone knowledgable look at Zoicon5's comments on Talk:List of Maine painters? Thanks. Martin 21:00 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I think it's rather superfluous to note that an individual on the list is a "painter". Clearly, they wouldn't belong on the list if they weren't. -- Infrogmation 17:41 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Lermontov?
I do not think that Mikhail Lermontov belongs to the list. He was a great poet but quite a mediocre painter, maybe we should exclude him?
[edit] Proposal for Complete Overhaul
The list is indeed completely chaotic. Some examples:
- Nationalities are sometimes linked to the country (e.g.: "Raphael, (1483-1520), [Italy|Italian] painter") and sometimes not (e.g.: "Leonardo da Vinci, (1452-1519), Italian painter, sculptor and inventor").
- The nationalities are not given (e.g.: "Franz Marc, (1880-1916)") , or are non-standard (e.g.: "U.S.", "USA", "American").
- Dates are sometimes not given (e.g.: "Miltos Manetas, Greek painter").
- Other professions & specialisations are mentioned (e.g.: "Abbasi, Riza, (1565 - 1635), Persian painter, miniatures and homoerotic")
- A few lines of biography are added (e.g.: "Juan Bautista Garcia (1904-1974), Corsican immigrant to Puerto Rico who later became the inspiration for the famed television show, Los Garcia")
- It's not really necesary to place "painter" behind every name, after all, this is a list of painters, one would expect the names on that list to be, indeed, painters.
- The general layout of an entry is not formalised.
- Etc.
Conclusion: this list requires a thorough cleanup.
Addendum: Painters needs it's own subcategory in a new subcategory "Artists" in "Culture - Art"
Proposal: complete overhaul of the article (and several others), a few possibilities:
- Seperate lists are made:
-
- [List_Of_Painters]. (disambiguation page to all the following lists):
-
- [List_Of_Painters_By_Name]. (the current [List_Of_Painters])
- [List_Of_Painters_By_Country]. (disambiguation page to all [List_Of_<InsertNationality>_Painters])
- [List_Of_Painters_By_Movement] (e.g.: Impressionist Painters, Renaissance Painters, etc.).
- [List_Of_Painters_By_Century] (self-evident).
-
- The lists are ordered as following:
-
- For the 'By_Name', Entries are given as followed: Name, Surname, (year of Birth-year of Death), e.g.: ("Franz Marc (1880-1946)"), this way, the names can be copied and pasted in all other lists. Nationalities are not really necessary(?).
- The lists are divided into categories (letters, countries, movements, centuries) and every category is sorted alphabetically.
-
- (Possible exception for 'By_Century': sorting by year or birth).
As for the name question: seeing as any webpage can be searched, it doesn't seem me as necessary to deviate from the standard "Name-Surname" form and place the surname first. Besides, most painters have their own seperate article.
Please comment or leave a message on my talk page.
Hraban 14:05, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- Looks damn fine to me - David Gerard 14:08, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
Cleanup fase I now complete:
- All entries have been standardised (to "Name Surname (Year of birth, Year of death)").
- As much as possible, dates have been added to the entries.
Cleanup fase II can now begin:
- All entries should be checked for correctness (spelling, correct dates).
- Links to articles should be checked (as well as seeing if there is perhaps an article, but with another title).
This leaves the case of determining "who should be on the list".
Proposal:
- The list should mention all artists who are on the sibling lists (by century, by movement, by style(?), by country), or rather: every artist should be on every other list (idealy).
- Therefore, we require a set of criteria to determine whether an artist is noteworthy enough to
be on the lists.
Criteria I propose:
- Influence (has the artist (or his work) influenced other artists or certain styles?)
- Value (is the artist an important painter for a certain movement/style/time/country/culture?)
Or, simpler:
- Would the artist get an article on wikipedia that would not be deleted?
Advice on the criteria would be more than welcome.
Hraban 12:35, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Guidelines for Inclusion
I have going through the list and nominating linked articles for deletion. I don't know if that is appropriate or not. There must be guidelines for inclusion on this list, or the millions of people who adequately and deftly weild paintbrushes will need entries. I suggest the guidlines for inclusion be: 1. A history of critical response in recognized journals and periodicals. 2.A consistent exhibition record in public galleries or records of participation with public galleries and foundations. 3. Evidence of a significant contribution to the discipline of painting in other capacities. I have done a cursory perusal of the list, and there are many that need to be deleted for the above reasons. -- Thamiel 17:15 6 Nov 2006
