Talk:Chiho Aoshima

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
Maintenance An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? Class: This article has not been assigned a class according to the assessment scale.

[edit] Copyvio

The text of this article has got copyvio written all over it ... However I can't find it on Google, which suggests it was copied from the same magazine that the photograph was taken from. Richard W.M. Jones 09:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I rewrote it and removed the image which certainly ain't "promotional" or fair use. Richard W.M. Jones 11:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't know anything about the subject, I was just working on the requested articles list, found this one had been created and did some basic non-content edits. Shiroi Hane 15:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
[Richard] WM jones : As an artist myself, a student of art history, criticism etc... and having met the artist when she was in town for the opening of the Japan Society exhibition in New York, I was merely trying to set right certain inaccuracies for an article that I myself created. Originally I spent a lot of time on a short essay about the artists work after consulting interviews, essays, etc.... all of which was erased by yourself because you wrongly questioned my intelligence and assumed it to be plagarized - only to put in a simplified and in my opinion completely inaccurate description of an artist that has done drawings, photos, mixed media work as well as large scale ink jet prints (the user in question labeled her a 'mural artist'). Therefore, I not only see myself as the victim of vandalism - more importantly I have concerns over the accuracy of the article in question especially as it relates to a forum or tool I have the utmost respect and love for - Wikipedia. Basically, you should be ashamed, Sir. [comment added by User:Joshua@shinkoyo.com ]
Well, I'm glad that it wasn't copyvio. However, by your own admission it was original research, and in any case it was not encyclopedic, which is why I rewrote it. I also removed the copyrighted image and replaced it with a public domain one. Please do not blank sections when editing pages. Richard W.M. Jones 09:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


Once again - you're completely wrong and seemingly unwillingly to admit it - it was not original research (although it did involve some 'original research' in a quite literal way) by wikipedia standards as my piece did not advance any ideas, theories or opinions and was in actuality a well thought out factual presentation of the artist, her practices, tendecies and history. Contrary to your newest false accusation, it was in fact 'encylopedic'. As for blanking certain sections, I would caution you to follow your own advice. You rewrote nothing. All I did was 'blank' your untruths and irrelevancies. [comment added by User:Joshua@shinkoyo.com ]
I don't know why I bother answering this, but anyway, interested readers are invited to read the original page [1] which I rewrote, to verify that it is original research, not encyclopedic, not in the style of other articles, and contains a copyright image. (The image is asserted to be "promotional", but in fact was taken for Harpers Bazaar magazine and there seems to be no explicit release for Wikipedia to use it - at least nothing that can be verified). To Joshua: Your contributions to Wikipedia are both welcome, and may be edited, deleted and rewritten at any time in accordance with Wikipedia's well known policies. Wikipedia:No_original_research, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Copyright#Celebrity_photographs Richard W.M. Jones 09:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)