Talk:Wheat Field with Crows

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Images 2 Capitalization 3 Essay 4 Copyvio

[edit] Images

The width of the picture needs to be cut down. It's wider than the normal article space. RickK 07:05, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Reformated the article and I think it looks pretty good.

Yeah, it looks good now. RickK 19:30, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

I removed Image:F_0779.jpg from Wheat Field with Crows and listed it on Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion with this entry:

Image:F 0779.jpg - obsoleted by Image:Vincent van Gogh (1853-1890) - Wheat Field with Crows (1890).jpg, both PD-Old. User:Bodhi395 uploaded original 35Kb version, and I uploaded better 258 KB version. I removed it from Wheat Field with Crows and informed both uploader, and Image talk:F 0779.jpg page. -Wikibob | Talk 23:36, 2005 Mar 30 (UTC)

I should mention I replaced it with the Commons image, same displayed size. -Wikibob | Talk 23:51, 2005 Mar 30 (UTC)

[edit] Capitalization

Lower or upper case 'v' for Van Gogh when it is printed without Vincent in front of it? See Talk:Vincent van Gogh (capitalization). I have consulted four books: 2 have van Gogh and 2 have Van Gogh. However, the Van Gogh Museum uses Van Gogh, and presumably they should get it right[1].

Tyrenius 16:19, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Essay

I have removed a long personal interpretation from the article under Wikipedia:No original research, as there are no references given for it. It can be found in the history.

Tyrenius 15:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio

Most of the text in this article is identical with an essay here. Since the text on that page includes additional formatting, hyperlinks, and footnotes (which have been dumped, all on one line, in the Conclusion section), I am inclined to believe that Wikipedia's article is just a cut-and-paste job. Strad 23:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Have you ever got that right - the copyright page for the website is here. I'm familiar with the site from some work back in college, and it's a reasonably good resource, but quite copyrighted. I have reverted to the last good version prior to the copy and paste. With that site as a reference, however, and the essay's sources (unattributed, I might add, in the copy over, so we'll need to get those), we can probably put together a better article.Cool moe dee 345 13:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Grenba just reintroduced the copyvio material (well, on October 23), and I removed it again and reverted to the last non-plagiarised version. I suggest someone watches this article to make sure it's not introduced again. In the meantime, I will post a warning on Grenba's talk page. Terraxos 20:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)