Talk:Graffiti/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

brooklynmuseum.org external link

This link: Brooklyn Museum Exhibition was added to the article by the site owner. In keeping with our guidelines could regular editors of this article check out the link and add it back if you think it appropriate. Thanks. -- Siobhan Hansa 00:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

tag (graffiti)

Tag (graffiti) redirects to here. Is there really no article about graffiti tags? I would imagine there would be a lot to say about them!

Kim Bruning 11:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Biased statement?

Does the last line in the United States Section of Government Responses seem biased to anyone? "Those who defend the application of graffiti to others' property have consistently failed to explain why they would not be upset if their own property, be it a car, clothing, I-pod, etc. were damaged by someone else." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VendettaCouncil (talk • contribs) 02:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Blog Link

I am quite disgusted that i am having an external link repeatedly removed. The link is to a blog on the legal war against graffiti, this NOT advertising OR self-promotion. I am an established journalist and have worked with and interviewed graffiti artists for over six years. My blog is new but is fast becoming very popular and has vital up to date information on the subject as well as interviews with the head of British Transport Police and THE most established and recognised writers in London and New York. Meaowza (Meaowza 11:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC))

Have you read the external links policy? There are links to it on all of the warnings on your talk page. Blogs are not typically considered to be verifiable sources, and adding a link to your own blog (five times, ignoring all warnings) is certainly self-promotion by any reasonable defition of the term. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Pictures in "Uses" section

It seems to me that the three pictures at the top of the "uses" section make the article seem a tad messy. I think it would be good if someone could rearrange the pictures or remove one of them to tidy it up a bit. Of course, it could be just me that thinks this, but I thought I'd mention it. Vsst 22:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Ack! This section is now even more scrambled than when I last saw it. :( Help! Vsst 03:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

South American graffiti

Why is there no mention of graffiti in South American countries and the Caribbean? There is a very fine and rich tradition of graffiti in south and central America, most especially in Brazil, and it ought to be covered in this article. thanks Peter morrell 12:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

'Computer Generated Graffito'

This image is not a Graffito itself, it is merely a picture of somebody undertaking in graffiti. The idea of 'computer generated graffiti' is nonsense, The closest thing I can think of is 'online vandalism' which bears no relation to graffiti.

It is likely that this image was placed on the page by someone seeking a little online exposure. I think they've had their turn, it's a poor image anyway. I hope no one is if I take a little initiative and remove it. PeterPartyOn 02:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Illegal Graffiti on the Wall?

I was thinking that if you do bad graffiti, it might be illegal to do that, because it could be against the law.--  PNiddy  Go!  0 03:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT VIOLATION

On the picture with lots of examples of graffitti i found it somewere else and think someone might have stolen it here's were i found if i'm wrong then sorry for the false alarm. [1] Xor24 talk to me 22:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk Page Archiving

I'm happy to create archives for some of the older threads on this talk page and configure User:MiszaBot to take care of archiving threads that are inactive after 45 days. Here's an example: Talk:Mass Effect. This OK with the regular contributers? cheers, --guyzero | talk 07:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Please do. There is way too much on this page. Key to the city 20:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Only took me 24 days! cheers, --guyzero | talk 20:20, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

This article as it stands is heavily biased

There is an obvious bias in favor of graffiti, which, as one contributor noted, is criminal and symptomatic of societal squalor. Clearly, I have my biases against graffiti, but this article fails to convey the fact that the general public detests it, and goes as far as to imply it is accepted.DougOfDoom talk 01:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

So, what you then do is: look for a reliable source that states something along the lines of: "general public detests graffiti". You add it to the article and you cite your source.
Good luck. Key to the city (talk) 15:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Law & Order attitudes are symptomatic of societal squalor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.162.190 (talk) 00:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[citation needed] --guyzero | talk 18:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Galleries removed

Hmrph! I liked those galleries (whine) and cannot see why an article on graffiti doesn't have a few more visual examples of, ahem, graffiti!. It is afterall a visual art! However, I retrieved, copied and pasted my gallery (pics I took myself previously called Gallery 2) to my own sandbox and if anyone is interested I can reveal the url on request. I shall also be adding to it soon. thanks Peter morrell 20:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not that visual examples aren't a good thing, but even now there are a lot of them for an article. It messes with readability if there are too many.
To explain myself: this is what I posted on the talk page of the user who submitted the political graffiti gallery:

Hi. I just wanted to explain my edit to you: I removed the gallery in the Graffiti article itself because there is already a link to a gallery of political graffiti present (the commons template in the external links section). The 'Uses' section also starts with an example of political graffiti and that is sufficient for the article itself as an visual example: see guidelines Wikipedia:Guide_to_layout#Images. I suggest you add the pictures to the gallery in commons, if you'd like. I also want to note that some of the pictures in the gallery weren't political though: e.g. the viking graffiti, the kilroy graffiti. Or what do you suggest? Key to the city (talk) 13:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You could also add your pictures to Commons... Key to the city (talk) 13:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)