User talk:67.71.82.210

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] December 2007

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, John McHale (artist). While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 13:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I presume you are refering to the double footnote citations and their not referencing the fact that Alloway did not use the term "pop art" in his often misqutoed 1958 article. Your commnent about disrupting the flow of the article does not apply since it is in a footnote, and not in the body of the main text. Also it needed to be clearly stated for wiki readers in the main article. (If Oxford had not rushed boldly into Press and consulted Cambridge University they would have found that McHale lectured on his "pop art" and design work at Cambridge University in the 1950's). You have been fighting this pop art attribution issue for years and hanging on to Lawrence Alloway's spurious account. You have been informed inumerable times about the fact that Alloway did not coin the term Pop art and you keep trying to fudge the issue,, quote rules, and cling to your shield. Please do not ask me to have to carry you on it. OttexDEC/007

You still persist in undoing the explanation to the incomplete Oxford Press references when you have repeatedly been given the citation, and that shows your lack of intellectual integrity. Once the American Academics (exemplified by MIT/ Robbins et al) turn their serious attention to the shoddy work of previous art historians you will see a deep sea change in the quality of research on the subject of British Pop art. At that point John McHale's major contributions will be recognised including his coining the term "pop art", and his complete Pop art works and Op art works at the TIT... In the meantime the public has to contend with incomplete poorly documented accounts of Alloway (and Hamilton) from the likes of Oxford University Press which you and others are relying on to justify undoing the wiki explanation. Ottex/007