To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 01:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
_____________________________
Posted by Coldcreation:
The image, a painting by Jean Metzinger, was published in 1913, can be found directly in the 1913 publication, or here: http://books.google.es/books?id=qYATQ3Rw6qgC&q=metzinger#v=snippet&q=metzinger&f=false The cubist painters By Guillaume Apollinaire, translated and analyzed by Peter F. Read, University of California Press, 25 oct. 2004 - 234 pages.
This image is in the public domain in the United States because it was first published outside the United States prior to January 1, 1929. Other jurisdictions have other rules. Also note that this image may not be in the public domain in the 9th Circuit if it was first published on or after July 1, 1909 in noncompliance with US formalities, unless the author is known to have died in 1953 or earlier (more than 70 years ago) or the work was created in 1903 or earlier (more than 120 years ago.)[1]
PD-USPublic domain in the United States//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Coldcreation
Do not copy this file to Wikimedia Commons. This file might not be in the public domain outside the United States and should not be transferred to Wikimedia Commons unless it can be verified to be in the public domain in its country of first publication and that at least 70 years have elapsed since the author died. Commons requires that images be free in the source country and in the United States. If this file is in the public domain outside the United States, add |pdsource=yes to this template to hide this warning. If this file is not in the public domain in the source country but will become so in the future, add |out_of_copyright_in= and then the year its copyright will expire.
— image first published outside of the U.S. before 1923
The Author of the original book where the painting was published, Guillaume Apollinaire died in 1918, so may qualify for:
This file is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 70 years or less.
PDPublic domainfalsefalse
This file might not be in the public domain in countries with copyright terms of life plus more than 70 years. This may include Mexico (100 years), Colombia (80 years), St. Vincent and the Grenadines (75 years) and Guatemala (75 years). Some images are not public domain in the United States until 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation (details). This image must be in the public domain in its source country and the United States to be transferred to the Wikimedia Commons.
— for images where the author (e.g., photographer, painter, graphic artist) died more than 70 years ago.
More information needed about File:Metzinger, The cubist painters, by Guillaume Apollinaire.jpg[edit]
Add a description of where the image comes from (not what it is) and who the creator is. Please be specific, and include a link if you can.
Find the appropriate license from the list of free, non-free media, or public domain options. Copy the license template and paste it in the file's page, and save.
If you follow these steps, your image can help enhance Wikipedia. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the media copyright questions page.
Thank you for your contribution! --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 01:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
_________________________Reply[reply]
Posted by Coldcreation
The image, a photograph of Jean Metzinger, published in 1913, can be found directly in the 1913 publication, or here: http://books.google.es/books?id=qYATQ3Rw6qgC&q=metzinger#v=snippet&q=metzinger&f=false The cubist painters By Guillaume Apollinaire, translated and analyzed by Peter F. Read, University of California Press, 25 oct. 2004 - 234 pages.
This image is in the public domain in the United States because it was first published outside the United States prior to January 1, 1929. Other jurisdictions have other rules. Also note that this image may not be in the public domain in the 9th Circuit if it was first published on or after July 1, 1909 in noncompliance with US formalities, unless the author is known to have died in 1953 or earlier (more than 70 years ago) or the work was created in 1903 or earlier (more than 120 years ago.)[2]
PD-USPublic domain in the United States//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Coldcreation
Do not copy this file to Wikimedia Commons. This file might not be in the public domain outside the United States and should not be transferred to Wikimedia Commons unless it can be verified to be in the public domain in its country of first publication and that at least 70 years have elapsed since the author died. Commons requires that images be free in the source country and in the United States. If this file is in the public domain outside the United States, add |pdsource=yes to this template to hide this warning. If this file is not in the public domain in the source country but will become so in the future, add |out_of_copyright_in= and then the year its copyright will expire.
— image first published outside of the U.S. before 1923
The Author of the original book, Guillaume Apollinaire died in 1918, so may qualify for:
This file is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 70 years or less.
PDPublic domainfalsefalse
This file might not be in the public domain in countries with copyright terms of life plus more than 70 years. This may include Mexico (100 years), Colombia (80 years), St. Vincent and the Grenadines (75 years) and Guatemala (75 years). Some images are not public domain in the United States until 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation (details). This image must be in the public domain in its source country and the United States to be transferred to the Wikimedia Commons.
— for images where the author (e.g., photographer, painter, graphic artist) died more than 70 years ago.
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:44, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. The problem seems to be solved...
Orphaned non-free image File:William Didier-Pouget, gravure exécutée en 1906 par Brauer.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:William Didier-Pouget, gravure exécutée en 1906 par Brauer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Composition, For "Jazz", Pour "Jazz", oil on board, 73 x 73 cm, first published in the Xeic York Herald, and The Literary Digest, 27 Oct. 1915.tiff[edit]
Hi, I'm not sure whether you knew that Robert Antoine Pinchon had been nominated for Did You Know? I've now reviewed it and have some concerns; could you have a look? In particular, there are several paragraphs with no reference, and Did You Know requires at least one reference per paragraph. I also think from the style and length in some places that you may have translated the Lespinasse book a bit too closely, but I can't see it to verify. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:28, 20 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From Coldcreation: Hi, thanks for your time spent. I've gone back and fixed up a few things (see edits) and added the citations where needed. Indeed, the Lespinasse book is a great source, not just for text but for photos. I did my best to put some of his writings into my own words. Otherwise I would place quotes around the text (in the case of a literal translation, usually short) Coldcreation (talk) 15:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I did see; thanks for all that effort! I did some further shortening and rewording and added two more mid-paragraph refs to Lespinasse on the assumption those facts were also from there. And I replaced the mention of a photo of him painting at age 12 with the one of a photo of him painting at age 8 that was in at least two sources I can see, and referenced it from one of them. I think between us we have probably eliminated any overly close translation there may have been, so I have given it its tick. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:09, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Coldcreation wrote: The photograph of R.A. Pinchon, on page 14 of Lespinasse, 2007, is from 1898. The painting pictured in that photograph is dated 98. He is clearly not 8 years old in that picture. So I can only assume that sources stating he is 8 years old are mistaken. Note too that there is, on the same page in Lespinasse, a color reproduction of the painting with the date visible. From 1 July 1898 Pinchon was 12. Aside from that change (which I just made) everything else appears accurate.Coldcreation (talk) 06:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 4[edit]
Hi. When you recently edited Albert Gleizes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Henry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What makes the author of the Henri Biva page think that the painter represented on the postcard at the top of the page, "Un coin du parc at Villeneuve l'Etang" is Henri Biva himself ? same question about the other postcard lower on the page, "Parc de Villeneuve l'Etang - promenade autour de l'Etang" ?
--Dmmtvg (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 1[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrew Dasburg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Lee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 8[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Art Deco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Entre Deux Guerres (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the notification. Those non-free images have now been removed for the userpage. Coldcreation (talk) 01:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for January 9[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for January 20[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Les Baigneuses (Gleizes), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Events and Multiplicity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited L'Oiseau bleu (Metzinger), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orphism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 10[edit]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Replaceable fair use File:Jean Metzinger, 1905-06, Baigneuse, Deux nus dans un jardin exotique (Two Nudes in an Exotic Landscape), oil on canvas, 116 x 88.8 cm.jpg[edit]
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. LGAtalkedits 11:40, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Possibly unfree File:Pablo Picasso, 1909, Brick Factory at Tortosa, oil on canvas, 50.7 x 60.2 cm, The State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg.jpg[edit]
The Copyright tag for this image has been modified to the more general PD-US-1923-abroad. As such, this image is perfectly suited to Wikipedia rules for the publication of images. This work by Pablo Picasso was published abroad before 1923, and thus can have no independent copyright in the United States. It is simply a faithful reproduction of an old, public domain, 2-dimensional work of art published outside the United States prior to 1923. Coldcreation (talk) 08:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 5[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cubist sculpture, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Congo and Christopher Green (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
a book about Joseph Csaky to the Further reading section of the article about him and you removed it,calling it "unproductive"?. What would be considered a productive title to add? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps 'unproductive' was not the right word. Sorry for that. But that book by Balas is referenced in the article 15 times (See section entitled References). There is no need to place the same reference in the article in yet another section: 'Further reading', which is already loaded with further things to read.Coldcreation (talk) 19:33, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Makes sense. I felt that I was having a "productive" day editing and that word just hit me wrong. Life is supposed to be interesting. Carptrash (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The intention was good, and that counts very much Carptrash. Coldcreation (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pseudonym, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AKA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:23, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The reason I removed the link from Clément Serveau to inforapid is because it fails our policy on reliable sources because it incorporates information from wikipedia (basically making it like referencing wikipedia itself) our policy on verification of information requires us to use third party sources that are reliable (information from that source can be trusted). If you have any questions let me know. Werieth (talk) 21:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I hadn't caught it. Coldcreation (talk) 05:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Proto-Cubism may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
a lo exótico'', [[Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum]], Madrid, 9 October 2012 - 13 January 2013]</ref>]]
so in both the domain of form and dynamics ([[Orphism (art)|Orphism]]) would do so with color too).<ref name="Mittelmann" />
While Marey's scientific achievements in [[photography]] and [[chronophotography]]) are indisputable, Muybridge's efforts were to some degree more artistic than scientific.<ref name=
<ref>Adaskina and Sarabianov, “Liubov Popova”, Amazons of the Avant-Garde, Royal Academy, p. 187.)</ref> Popova continues her work at ''La Palette'' until May, while Udaltsova returned to Moscow
Excellent, thanks Mandarax, I think both the artist and the painting (wherever it may or may not be) merit the nomination. Good article, by the way, your Georg Muche. Coldcreation (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I had difficulty with the Muche article and was just glad to be done with it. I wish I was as good a writer as you are, but I plod along doing the best I can.... MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM 21:58, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hadn't looked at the Jean Metzinger article for a long time. Not long ago, when it was a tiny stub, I put it on my long list of articles that I'd like to expand some day. Wow, I checked it out today. Thanks for enabling me to cross that off the list! I'm sure you did a much better job than I would have. Ah, I just wish it had been nominated for DYK. It's been on my watchlist forever, but I guess I missed it when you were working on the expansion. (Alas, the vandals get more of my watchlist attention.) Thanks for the great work you're doing! MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM 10:54, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The DYK stalled because someone left an absolutely ridiculous comment (the 201-character hook was over the limit of 200) and, unfortunately, there's a mentality at DYK that, once someone has added a comment, no matter how ridiculous, nobody else will touch the nomination. Somebody finally left a useful comment – that there are some unreferenced paragraphs. DYK guidelines suggest that there be at least one inline citation for every paragraph other than the lead (with a few exceptions). Can you add citations to the paragraphs which have none? Thanks. Oh, and thanks again for all of your hard work. These days, I think you're the person who pops up on my watchlist most often. MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM 07:40, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, certainly. I'll get right on it. The paragraphs will be referenced shortly. And thanks again for your support. Coldcreation (talk) 07:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw the notice yesterday, Mandarax. Was waiting to see the number of views. I'm glad it idid well, will hold a place in the hall of fame and be permanently archived. I think Metzinger would have appreciated it too had he been around. Such a sensitive and intelligent man, he deserves the recognition for sure. Thanks again Mandarax... Coldcreation (talk) 10:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Couchée de soleil no. 1 (Metzinger), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poincaré sphere (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1911 in art may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
*[[Albert Gleizes]] - ''[[Portrait of Jacques Nayral (Gleizes)|Portrait de Jacques Nayral]''
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
juxtaposed one next to the other form a section of the painting. Each section of the painting (containing between 10 of 50 'tiles' dominated by blues, reds, and greens. There is no smooth
a lo exótico'', [[Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum]], Madrid, 9 October 2012 - 13 January 2013]</ref>]]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Léonce Rosenberg may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
''Carton d'invitation à l'exposition Csaky chez Léonce Rosenberg'', Galerie l'Effort Moderne (Galerie Léonce Rosenberg}, Carton illustré au pochoir, 3 couleurs (printed), 12,5 x 16 cm, 1920, Paris. Source : Kandinsky
Léonce Rosenberg]</ref> at 19 Rue de la Baume. The gallery was open to all forms of [[Cubism}Cubist]] and [[Abstract art]]. What followed would be a series of major [[Solo show (art exhibition)
on canvas, 81.3 x 54.3 cm. Jacques Lipchitz, Paris, acquired directly from the artist, 1916-c. 1921]; by exchange to Léonce Rosenberg, Paris, c. 1921-1922
inscribed: "pour Léonce Rosenberg, très amicalement AG", Rosenberg inventory number: AM 2000-206 (14, Centre Georges Pompidou]
T&Page=14 Livre d'or de Léonce Rosenberg, Musée National d'Art Moderne - Centre Georges Pompidou]]
FYI - I've added {{Do not move to Commons|expiry=2034}} to your 3 images - the artist died in 1964, so under German law, he and his descendants have full copyright until 70 years post death. As they are pre-1923, they are OK to stay on en-Wiki. Ronhjones (Talk) 23:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 12[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 19[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Man on a Balcony (Gleizes), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Quinn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On 19 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article En Canot, Im Boot (Metzinger), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Jean Metzinger's painting En Canot(pictured in black and white) appeared in the Nazi Degenerate Art catalogue with the notation "Even this was once taken seriously and bought for good money!"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/En Canot, Im Boot (Metzinger). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Why does the title of that Jean Metzinger painting, contain a French mistake? Do you know what the history behind it is? Contact Basemetalhere 19:49, 19 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good question Basemetal. The source of the error, as far back as I could find, is from a publication: Neo-Impressionism, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Robert L. Herbert, 1968.
In Neo-Impressionism it is written on page 219:
161 LANDSCAPE (COUCHER DU SOLEIL). 1906-1907
Oil on canvas, 28 1/2 x 39 1/4" (72.5 x 100 cm.).
Signed l.r. "J. Metzinger" and verso "Couchée de soleil no. 1".
Verso: RlVER SCENE WlTH SHlPS.
Collection Rijksmuseum Kröller-Müller, Otterlo.
There is a a photograph of the verso of the painting in the same publication. The title Metzinger wrote on the back is in fact neither COUCHER DU SOLEIL (Coucher du soleil) or Couchée de soleil no. 1
Next to Metzinger's signature on the reverse, the title reads: Coucher de soleil. The n° 1 is written above that title.
Unfortunately, I had not examined very closely the back of the work or I clearly would have seen Metzinger's actual title before publishing this article. Note: the verso has another painting (River scene with ships) upon which is superimposed, upside down relative to the River scene, Metzinger actual title. There is a mosaic-like rectangle of paint above the "e" of Coucher that looks like an acute accent (accent aigu). However, the "r" that follows is certainly not another "e" forming 'Couchée' as Robert Herbert must have thought.
So the correct title of this work is indeed Coucher de soleil no. 1.
Now all I need to figure out is how to change the title of the article. In the mean time I will, thanks to your inquiry, change the title where it appears in the article. Thanks again Basemetal. EDIT-> I've just added this discussion to the talk page of the article in question. Coldcreation (talk) 21:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Jean Metzinger.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Jean Metzinger.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:02, 23 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Geometric abstraction
Thank you for creating and contributing to quality articles on art, artists and their works, such as Geometric abstraction, Antoni Tàpies, En Canot, and for defining yourself by your and their work alone with that gallery of a user page, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
An appropriate copyright tag explaining the basic claim of fair use is given for each work.
A separate, detailed, specific fair use rationale is provided each time the image is used in an article. The name of the article within which the image appears is included in the rationale.
These are low resolution images used for encyclopedic purposes. They are essential to the articles in question. Please do not remove them for their respective articles. In the mean time, I will look into the {{PD-1923}} tag possibility. Thanks for you help. Coldcreation (talk) 19:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 26[edit]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).
So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.
What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.
The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.
Can you help translate from hungarian into english that article is about István Tóth hungarian photographer - at hungarian user Kispados request -? Should be a nice day! Apród (talk) 23:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston..jpg|150px]] || [[La Femme aux Phlox (Gleizes)|La Femme aux Phlox (Woman with Phlox]] || 1910 || 81 x 100 cm || The Museum of Fine Arts || Houston
* Letter to Herwarth Walden, 30 April 1920], Der Sturm, Berlin, Nationalgalerie, September, 1961, p. 46
successful union of a broad field of vision with a flat picture plane. Earlier studies, such as [''By the Seine (Bord de la Seine, Meudon)'' of 1909, and ''Road, Trees and Houses (Environs de
Wikipedia told me you this article was your first edit. Never mind the sources thing. Surfer43 (talk) 03:25, 24 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for July 24[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bords de la Marne (Gleizes), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nabi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for July 31[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Passy, Bridges of Paris (Gleizes), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Perspective (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Jean Metzinger, 1905-06, Baigneuse, Deux nus dans un jardin exotique (Two Nudes in an Exotic Landscape), oil on canvas, 116 x 88.8 cm.jpg[edit]
Given the files age I really doubt it is non-free Werieth (talk) 12:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Jean Metzinger.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Jean Metzinger.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 02:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A page you started (Le Pont aux Anglais, soleil couchant) has been reviewed![edit]
Wikipedia editor Amanda Jane Mason just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Excellent article. Couldn't see the relevance of some of the painting in the Gallery, for example the Turner. Van Gogh has a Landscape with a Carriage and a Train where he also deliberately paid homage to an emerging industrial age some thirty years before.
To reply, leave a comment on Amanda Jane Mason's talk page.
Thank you Amanda. Great point. I have just revised the image gallery practically entirely. Found some very relevant works to include.Coldcreation (talk) 09:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah yes, Vincent's Bridges across the Seine at Asnieres - even better! Amanda Jane Mason (talk) 09:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Amanda Jane Mason. I appreciate that Barnstar very much.!.!. :) Coldcreation (talk) 22:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for September 13[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Société Normande de Peinture Moderne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pierre Dumont (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 13 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically User:Coldcreation, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 14:50, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for September 20[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 20 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Tomer T. Yes, sorry, I should have explained as I made the change (EDIT: though I notice you did not give a reason for your edit either). I happened upon the Renoir article a few days ago and was pleasantly surprised to see a photo of the artist snapped during his first artistic peak, at a time around which he was painting Le Moulin de la Galette, during the Impressionist period, before the turn of the century, at a time when he was considered as a ground-breaking artist.
The image of Renoir you included (in place of the former) is similar to the ones found throughout the Internet, of a Renoir towards the end of his career, well beyond his prime as an artist, at a time when Impressionism had already been replaced as an avant-garde phenomenon first by Symbolism, then Neo-Impressionism, Divisionism, Fauvism, and even Proto-Cubism (c. 1910). If you would like to discuss the matter further, to reach some form of general consensus, feel free to post in the Talk section of the Renoir article. Coldcreation (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 1[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Op art, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constructivism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We cannot change the alignment of the gallery tag as this template is baked into mediawiki but imho the packed mode, easier on the eye, overcomes this inconvenient. Hope this helps. Alberto Fernández Fernández (talk) 19:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 8[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Musée d'Orsay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georges Lacombe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Art Deco may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
], an 18 storey condominium (1929), The Sunlife Building, The Bell Telephone Baker Exchange (first telephone exchange in the [[British Empire]] (1929), Dominion Public Building refurbished
Gustave Miklos is the only red link sculptor on the List of sculptors, where I pretty much routinely remove such links. It would be great if you could throw together a stub for the fellow and turn his link blue. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 01:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your message Carptrash. I actually had started to create a stub for Miklos yesterday, then got sidetracked. I will put something together very shortly, and expand it at a later date. Coldcreation (talk) 06:04, 12 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He looks like an interesting character. The recent book about him (in French) costs 225 Euros, a bit out of my range. I'll stick with Eli Harvey. Carptrash (talk) 16:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just posted the draft article Gustave Miklos (it's not really a stub). Draft because I stopped his biography around 1927. Coldcreation (talk) 00:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 15[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gustave Miklos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pierre Dumont (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 15 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Coldcreation - I'd rather see the quote showcased within the article. It is a striking quote, and was selected by art critic John Berger for special mention. It does more good than harm where it is. Perhaps the quote in the lower section can be removed, it you prefer. What do you think?36hourblock (talk) 19:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would rather see the quote in the section where it belongs; Brâncuși on his own work. As it stands now that quote seems contextually out of place in the article. I'm moving this conversation to the Brâncuși Talk page for any further discussion. Coldcreation (talk) 22:27, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to English language may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
is not an official language in most countries, it is currently the language most often taught as a [[foreign language]).{{citation needed|date=July 2013}} It is, by international treaty, the official language for
loss of final syllables due to stress (e.g. OldEng ''gamen'' > ModEng ''game'', OldEng ''ǣrende'' > ModEng ''errand''), not because Germanic words are inherently shorter than Latinate words (the
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joseph Csaky may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
for lights and great artists, Csaky made the decision to move to [[Paris]] [[France]], and did so (with only forty ''[[French franc|francs]]'' in his pocket. He traveled mostly by foot, walking
[[Image:Joseph Csaky, Head, 1913, Plaster lost. Photo René Richard, Joseph Csáky, Frankfurt, 1988.
Dear Coldcreation,
You have reverted my corrections to Bohr's Philosophy section. I have made every effort to comply with the Wikipedia guidelines, but if I have missed anything I would appreciate an openly voiced correction, rather than a silent deletion. As it currently is, the article grossly misrepresents a very important aspect of Bohr's life, and showing only one side of this issue violates every principle of honest representation. I would be happy to consider any specific and relevant criticisms on the matter, but for the integrity of the article and the quality of your own reputation it seems in your interest to undo this deletion for now. Thank you for your work.
If you would like to include your text in the article post it first in the Talk page for consensus. Nothing personal, but the article seemed better before your post. The quote you used was unrelated to Bohr (per your source link), and the long sentences were awkwardly composed. Certainly, you could come up with another way of saying what you wrote. Using shorter sentences may help, along with quotes directly related to Bohr's position on the topic. Thanks for your comprehension. Coldcreation (talk) 07:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tate Modern may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
This painting was reproduced in ''Fantasio'': published 15 October 1911, for the occasion of the [[Salon d'Automne'' where it was exhibited the same year.
Thank you for uploading the picture "Idyllische Flusslandschaft.jpg", but, most of the pictures I had inserted before on the Paul Biva page have been deleted (and probably those you mention as having worked on because they were "floues") because they had not been officially published before : i.e. in an exhibition catalogue, or by a commercial publisher. Even pictures from auction sales are not allowed, although they may have been published in a catalogue. Therefore your picture "Idyllische Flusslandschaft.jpg", from the catalogue of the auctioneers Dorotheum will probably be deleted by the same robot or "cleaner". I have the feeling that the French wikipedia is a lot stricter than the English/American one. Otherwise i would have many more pictures form both Henri, Paul and Lucien Biva to upload !--Martine Vidal (talk) 18:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Martine Vidal, thanks for your input and contribution to the Biva articles. Wikimedia Commons is an online repository of free-use images. The work of Paul Biva is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 100 years or less. I've just added the template PD-art-100 to the Commons images for Paul Biva. There is no reason why the photos you uploaded cannot be used in the French Paul Biva article. The user that removed them for the Paul Biva article was not justified in doing so. They need not be published. My only recommendation is to use good quality images. Pictures from auction sales are allowed. The images you uploaded are in the public domain because they represent works of art painted by a French artist who died more than 100 years ago. I will see if I can find some nice works by P. Biva online, and I will upload them to Commons, then I will proceed to post them in the French Paul Biva article. Let me know what you think. P.S. I would love for you to upload more Paul and Henri Biva works to Commons. Coldcreation (talk) 18:49, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Martine, I've just upload to Commons some works by Paul Biva. They are now in the French Wikipedia article Paul Biva. See Galerie. I also modified the image of Paul himself; a wonderful photo by the way. I hope the enhancement to your liking. Do you have any photographs of Henri Biva? Coldcreation (talk) 00:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bonjour, many thanks for the addition of the Paul Biva Galerie; I do hope it stays uploaded. The argument given for deleting my own images was : "retrait de sources primaires (ventes aux enchères)", and I had this, previously : "L'article est illustré de plusieurs œuvres émanant d'une « collection privée ». Si ces œuvres n'ont pas été reproduites dans des sources secondaires vérifiables (monographies éditées à compte d'éditeur, catalogue d'exposition de musée reconnu, article dans la presse...), elles constituent des sources primaires et devront donc être retirées. --90.2.33.82 (d) 7 octobre 2012 à 23:35 (CEST)".
The pictures I might add are from my personal collection of paintings, so I expect they would even less qualify, but I will try as soon as I have time. Again many thanks for your help. --Martine Vidal (talk) 16:48, 13 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Martine. The person that informed you and deleted the images didn't know what s/he was doing. These images (yours included) are perfectly usable in Wikimedia Commons, and thus in Wikipedia for any country that respects the PD-art-100 law, copyright term of life of the author plus 100 years. All Paul Biva (and Henri Biva) works are in the public domain in the source country: in this case France. If anyone removes the images let me know.
So, do you have any Henri Biva images (of the artist or his work) that you would be willing to share? A long time ago, 9 March 2012, after correcting dates for Henri Biva and for Lucien Biva, you wrote "I have a few more details about the Biva family that I may add". I'm still waiting? : ) Coldcreation (talk) 18:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 21[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexandre Mercereau, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Julio González (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 21 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 28[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 28 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On New Year's Day, 600 years ago, Giovanni Bellini began work on a rather large "Dejeuner sur l'herbe" but having set up the models and commenced the painting, he soon found that he was in no fit state to continue it. At this point Titian stepped in. That's him on the extreme left. Bellini is sleeping it off under a bush.
File:Robert Antoine Pinchon, Le Pont aux Anglais, soleil couchant, 1905, oil on canvas, 54 x 73 cm, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Rouen.jpg[edit]
Disambiguation link notification for January 8[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Daniel Robbins (art historian), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Golding and Douglas Cooper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi! You reverted my removal of copyvio material from Dick Higgins even though I clearly described it as such in my edit summary, and gave the link, http://archives2.getty.edu:8082/xtf/view?docId=ead/870613/870613.xml. You also did the same at three other articles. I'm quite sure you didn't mean to add copyright-infringing material to the encyclopaedia, but that is what you have done. Rather than undo your edits, I thought it would be more polite to ask you to do so yourself. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:23, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Justlettersandnumbers. There is likely a misunderstanding. I simply replaced the External links you removed from three articles. While it is not recommended to provide many external links, several you removed were of importance. They should probably be selectively included rather than across-the-board deleted (as you have done). Your Getty links appears valuable, and so I will leave you to choose the course of action to take. Though I would dislike to see many more mass-deletions of external links in the near future (as I feel they add often precious information to the encyclopedic content provided to our users). As far as I know, adding external links does not amount to adding copyright-infringing material. Thanks for your kind message. Coldcreation (talk) 11:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your pleasant reply. The copyvio is not in the link, but in the description that follows it, which in almost every case this user, whose only activity under three or perhaps four names has been to spam links to the Getty archive (not something that is likely to please that outstanding institution), has copied verbatim from the archive description. If you feel that the links themselves are valuable (they were, as I recall, also broken, btw), then I will probably just remove the descriptions from them if I do not find that you have already done so when I get around to that.
On external links in general, it's my opinion that since excessive external links are generally discouraged and numerous references are encouraged, the best thing to do with useful links is to use them as references. What about something like "His papers are now in the Getty Foundation archive"<ref>? Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Greetings! I have reverted your bold move of Daniel Robbins so that the move may be discussed. Per Wikipedia:Requested moves, potentially controversial moves must be discussed through a move request before the move is carried out. Any move of a page with a longstanding title and/or a large number of incoming links should be considered potentially controversial. Furthermore, per WP:TWODABS, it is not necessary to have a disambiguation page if there are only two possible meanings of a term, and one of them can be considered the primary topic of the term. In that case, it is sufficient to place a hatnote at the top of the primary topic page indicating the existence of the other page. Since no discussion has occurred with respect to these articles, no evidence has been presented to upset the presumption that the longstanding page at this title is the primary topic of this title. Cheers! bd2412T 14:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Coldcreation. Your requested move at Talk:Daniel Robbins#Requested move has run for seven days but is now up for closure. So far nobody but yourself has commented. If I were to close it now, most likely the result would be No Move, since the programmer Daniel Robbins has more than 250 incoming links on Wikipedia. This is not really a judgment on the world-historical importance of either person, but when there are only two people to be distinguished, putting a hatnote on the top of one of them is commonly done. Which one will get the unqualified name, and which one gets the hatnote, is negotiable but may not be a crucial decision. I also discussed this at User talk:BD2412#Talk:Daniel Robbins#Requested move. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the suggestions. I don't think the number of incoming links should trump notability, so another week would probably be a good idea. Coldcreation (talk) 01:39, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for pointing out the error in my poorly thought page-move. I felt the best way to correct it was a three-part move: I moved Rodin's sculpture back to "The Kiss (Rodin sculpture)", while moving, for consistency, Brâncuși's sculpture to "The Kiss (Brâncuși sculpture)". Meanwhile, I made "The Kiss (sculpture)" a disambiguation page. Please feel free to comment and/or fix/revert anything I may have screwed up. Thanks again! Joefromrandb (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to say that I appreciate your efforts in cleaning up my piece on Dubois. Never sure whether to put "musée" or "Musée"! Thanks again
Weglinde (talk) 08:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, you undid my edit, saying "source needed for such a claim" [4]. WP:LEADCITE advises
Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material.
The claim is supported by the sources in the body of the article. —rybec 11:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Feel free to revert my revert, but the list of things Picasso did is already extensive in the intro. He also enjoyed shooting photographs. But this fact and the ones you wrote are not the most important points covered in the article, which is the purpose of the lead. Perhaps the word artist is sufficient. Coldcreation (talk) 14:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The term "artist" encompasses all the other activities, but isn't usually understood to include writing. —rybec 21:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your revert of my edits to Arthur Dove is in direct contracted with the policy-backed consensus at WP:NFCR. Regardless of whether there is a FUR, consensus determined that the images fail WP:NFCC and should therefore be removed. I do not care either way, I just made the close as an uninvolved editor. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No need to scream. I will find more public domain images of this important artists works (published before 1923). Coldcreation (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do apologize for raising my caps; you are correct that was uncalled for. Also, I should have phrased it better, I do not care if the images are used. But I do care if policy is followed and consensus determined that those images did not. It looks like there are many many paintings by Dove that are in the public domain. The other option is to make the images not violate WP:NFCC (specifically #8) and gain consensus for their inclusion. As an outsider, it looks like there is no context of the Me and the Moon image in the infobox. Per WP:NFCC there must be critical commentary and there was none. For the other image (Nature Symbolized or Reefs) the article only discusses that he creates it. Point 8 of WP:NFCC requires that there be content in the article about the non-free images that requires the images be included. What this breaks down to is you don't need to see the image to know he painted it. But if there were content about the style he painted on that specific image, and why he painted, or the colors, etc, it would be necessary to the image being there. Good luck with whatever you choose to do. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Does that account belong to you? Its user page says it does, but your user page doesn't mention the other account. See WP:SOCK#NOTIFY. —rybec 13:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes it does. See https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Coldcreation2 and User:Coldcreation2 where it is mentioned (no puppetry involved) with a link to User:Coldcreation. I would love to have only one account (Coldcreation), and I thought I registered with Unified login (for Commons, Wikiquotes, etc. where I also contribute). For some reason when I edited French articles only my IP address showed up. If you know how to unify my accounts let me know. Coldcreation (talk) 14:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for answering. I meant that User:Coldcreation has no mention of the other account. WP:SOCK#NOTIFY point #2 recommends having links on both pages. The unified login doesn't always work for me, either. —rybec 16:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see you have canceled several times ARTUNAD's changes on Gustave Miklos's page. ARTUNAD was recently blocked 24h on French Wikipedia for vandalism and multiple passages strength. This is a repeat offender. Because of him, Heddryin put the blindfold R3R on Gustave Miklos's page (French Wikipedia). I quote Heddryin (28/11/2013) : "Malgré de nombreuses remarques de différents contributeurs, ARTUNAD continue à imposer son point de vue dans cet article. Le bandeau R3R est mis en place".
Its main source is the book of Mrs Danuta Cichocka (Gustave Miklos. Un Grand œuvre caché), published in September 2013 by her own publishing house (so without no review committee). This book was rejected as source on French Wikipedia because it has no reputation (it is just allowed to appear in the bibliography section).
You may also notice that A(r)TUNAD = DANUTA backwards. ARTUNAD looking to advertise Mrs Danuta Cichocka's book (600 copies, each of which costs 225 euros).
Merci, BerAnth (talk). I will go back to the English Gustave Miklos article and remove anything left behind by that user. Thanks for keeping me posted. Coldcreation (talk) 10:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 17[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jacques Doucet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, would you like to add some text about Doucet's hotel to Jacques Doucet just to give the image a bit more context? As it currently stands, it is floating there, without contextualisation, and doesn't relate to anything currently in the article text. I nearly removed it as a good-faith edit, but thought I'd ask you first if you had any interest in expanding the article with a section about the hotel to contextualise it. I HAVE moved the image to the other side though, as it knocked the layout a bit out. All best, Mabalu (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Certainly. Thanks for contacting me first. As soon as I get a moment I will expand on the Doucet studio image.Coldcreation (talk) 13:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added some info (much of it in the image caption already, now in the main body of text also), but will be back to elaborated further still later. Coldcreation (talk) 13:52, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fantastic! Thanks so much. Mabalu (talk) 14:06, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 7[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paul Biva, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Isdes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I work with the Clyfford Still Museum and have been attempting to strengthen the Clyfford Still wikipedia page. The times I have made edits, they have been deleted. Just know that we are gathering our references to make the content verifiable, and would appreciate some feedback or comments form you concerning the success of the page. Which parts need citations immediately, and which can be added after the skeleton of the page is fleshed out?
When making changes in the article, please briefly describe the changes you have made in the Edit summary (located towards the bottom of the page you are editing). Also, note that you can make changes and preview them before actually saving the page (by clicking on the Show preview button, next to Save). In this way you can make several changes before finally saving a number of changes. This will make it easier for other editors to view the changes you've made. If you feel some of your previous edits to the Clyfford Still article are worthy of retaining feel free to reintroduce the material, but be sure to provide sources and references. A final note, be careful not to remove references and sources linked to the material already in the article, as you did in this edit. Thanks, Coldcreation (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have changed back the edits you have made to song titles on the Genesis page. I think you will find on articles for many other acts that songs are in speech marks and album titles are in italics, so the Genesis article was correct and consistent with other pages before you made your changes.Rodericksilly (talk) 22:14, 31 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, no problem. You did the right thing. I should have checked first. Thanks for pointing this out. Coldcreation (talk) 04:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sculpture may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
their works.<ref>Burford, Alison, "Greece, ancient, §IV, 1: Monumental sculpture: Overview, 5 c)" in [[Oxford Art Online]], accessed August 24th, 2012</ref> In the [[Middle Ages]] artists such
[[File:Venus-of-Schelklingen.jpg|thumb|260px|[[Venus of Hohle Fels]] (also known as the [[Venus of Schelklingen]]; is an [[Upper Paleolithic]] [[Venus figurines|Venus
idol large retouched.jpg|Cycladic statue 2800−2300 BC. parian marble; {{convert|1.5|m|ft}} high (largest known example of cycladic sculpture. From Amorgos
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Marcel Duchamp may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Henri Matisse may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Hi, you appear to be a little trigger happy with your undo's at Georges Seurat. From the history, I can see there is a lot of vandalism and assorted nonsense going on, resulting in endless undos. Maybe you are not accustomed to seeing any constructive edits?
You removed sourced and perfectly referenced material
You removed an image which is actually discussed in the text and which depicts a person discussed in the text
You removed an image which illustrates his life/death
Your summary says: "Only major works". Since when? why? This is about an individual. Images illustrating subject's life are perfectly okay.
You earlier removed his (sourced) date of birth from his bio because it is "a repetition of the intro". An intro is a summary, a bio is supposed to be complete. As a result of your edit, Seurat's date of birth is currently unsourced again.
This article really needs some help (lots of unsourced material, errors, glaring omissions) and is rather poor for a major artist like this. I would be happy to help, but not like this. Cheers, Superp (talk) 06:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps you are correct. Though his birth dates is already mentioned twice in the article (lead and infobox). A third time may not be needed. No source for this date was removed. An image of his sepulture at Cimetière du Père-Lachaise is certainly not needed in the article (it neither illustrates his life or death). Imagine how many gravestone images would be found at Wikipedia if such were included in all article about dead people (or even half of them). In this case it adds nothing to the article. Feel free to add more material but make sure you provide sources. Coldcreation (talk) 07:20, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi again.
Summary: you complain about unsourced material, but I added none. You revert edits which add valid sources instead. Confusion ensues.
I actually bought this book (new, very well researched I think, great illustrations) partly because I thought it would be a valuable WP source. I came to this article because I think it could be better. Almost everything I did so far, though I referenced it down to the exact page number, was kicked out by you. Seeing my edits being reverted like this demotivates like hell.
As an aside, if you are an art lover and interested in Seurat c.s., get the book. ISBN9789073313286.
I have taken the time again to inspect every single edit I did, and can not find one bit that I did not ref. You keep talking about unsourced stuff. Can you please point out this alleged unsourced material, so I can improve my work method if needed? Please provide a link to the diff. Thank you.
Seurat's birthdate was unsourced. After my edit, it was sourced. Now, after your revert, it is unsourced again. How is this better?
The bit about Knoblock/Knobloch and their first child was unsourced. I added facts and a source, you reverted, so now we have unsourced text again and less facts. Why?
That's two fact/ref relations I added, you rev'd.
The tomb situation: you formulate a personal opinion as a fact. I think, on the other hand, the img brings across the time Seurat lived and his family background. Nothing wrong with feeding the other half of the brain. It's something we could discuss.
If you want me to contribute to the article, let me put this nicely, we have to work together in a different way. This is just frustrating and wasting my time.
This discussion is now moved to Georges Seurat (Talk). For any further discussion of the topic please refer to the Talk page in question. Coldcreation (talk) 14:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi! Would you care to review my FA nomination for the article Of Human Feelings? The article is about a jazz album by Ornette Coleman, and the criteria for FA articles is at WP:FACR. If not, feel free to ignore this message. Cheers! Dan56 (talk) 03:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for July 24[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Auguste Perret, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tour Perret. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. I'm Doug 4. I noticed that you reverted my photo change for the Henry Moore sculpture on the Modernism page. I agree that a bronze would be preferable to the white painted plaster, but the photo angle of that bronze sculpture doesn't give an adequate sense of the sculpture's form, which for me is what distinguishes his work. I was looking on Wikipedia for something more like "Reclining Mother and Child" (1960-1), but the "Reclining Figure" (1951) was the best I could find. Doug4 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:49, 11 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Doug4, indeed, the white painted plaster is not typical of what one would expect of a work by Moore. However, at Wikimedia Commons, Henry Moore and also at Commons in the Category:Henry Moore there are quite a few bronzes that are exemplary of the artists works. Feel free to chose the one you think will fit best in the article. Best regards. Coldcreation (talk) 05:23, 12 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello ColdCreation. I think this photo might be a better choice. Reclining Figure (1957-1958) by Henry Moore in front of the Kunsthaus Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.What do you think?
The sculpture looks good and is quite representative of the artists work. Though I wish the photographer would have cropped the background, or framed the sculpture a little closer during the photoshoot. I'll let you make the call. Best. Coldcreation (talk) 21:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with your comments. I cropped the photo and inserted it in the Modernism article. I hope you approve. Cheers! Doug4 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, saw that discussion now, but still, I think the pictures really is not quite enough to demonstrate Monet's diversity, and development. Many of them are the same: it's all water-lilies and ponds and bridges and and La Gare Saint-Lazare... it is getting close to a kind of clichés. Actually same with van Gogh too, he made so many paintings that are airy, using pinks and light blues -and NOT always the strong colours he is known for. Anyway - Monet has many less iconic, but wonderful pictures worth showing - don't want to create the idea that Monet=water lillies. Maybe it will be an an other article, if there is no place for them there. Hafspajen (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC).Reply[reply]
I fully understand your point and sympathize with you. However, this discussion should take place on the Monet Talk page rather than here. That will likely be another heated debate within which I will gladly participate. Cheers. Coldcreation (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry about that - I didn't see that there was already another very similar image. Thanks for noticing. Perhaps the image I was inserting is a clearer one, so maybe it should be swapped in to the place where the other rodin-signature is now? Wittylama 15:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. My name is Eric Albert. I am a journalist working for Le Monde You can see my articles on this page
I am contacting you as I am going to write an article about the interesting debate regarding the Paris page on Wikipedia in English, especially about the question of the Defense photo. I stumbled upon it by chance, researching something completely different but find the dispute very interesting. It raises interesting questions about the image of Paris but also about who decides what on Wikipedia. Would it be possible to talk to you about it, as you have contributed to the page?
Sorry if it is not the right place to contact you, I am not a Wikipedia editor and not used to its internal system, although I did write a story about Wikipedia (behind a paywall) during the last Wikimedia conference in London (I am based in London).
Many thanks. Eric Albert Londres (talk) 16:17, 7 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Eric Albert Londres, I will gladly participate. I would also contact ThePromenader at his Talk page, as he, perhaps more so than anyone else, has been dealing with this for some time; he is well aware of the subject matter and the problems related to it. If you would like to send us an email (with your contact coordinates), feel free to follow these simple instructions.
If you have set an email address in your User preferences, you can exchange emails with other users through the Wikipedia user interface. To do that, visit your correspondent's user page and follow the "Email this user" link in the "toolbox" on the left-side navigation menu. The email address you entered in your user preferences will appear as the "From" address of the mail, so the recipient will be able to reply...
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mural may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
Liturgy'', in ''Image and Christianity: Visual Media in the Middle Ages'', Pannonhalma Abbey, 2014), 136-151]</ref>
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Auguste Bonheur may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
'''Auguste Bonheur''' (3 November 1824 in Bordeaux – 21 February 1884 in Bellevue (Seine-et-Oise)<ref>[http://
Hi CC. I noticed you've reverted recent vandalism to Sistine Chapel. Not sure if its on your watchlist or whether you were just recent edits patrolling at the time. I thought I should let you know that I've requested pending changes protection to reduce the level of vandalism. To approve edits you would need the reviewer right. If you have any ongoing interest in the article you may want to request it. Cheers, St★lwart111 05:33, 14 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi,
I regret informing you that the big image (Totem) illustrating the english page of Gustave Miklos, this image is not included in his Catalogue raisonné (publishing 2014). So is not the work of Miklos. It will be more careful to remove it.
Contact me if you need the assistant to make the new choice because unfortunatly for this artist, on Web and Wikimedia Communs, we find more of falses than of the originals works of Miklos.
Best, Artunad — Preceding unsigned comment added by ARTUNAD (talk • contribs) 15:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 18[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gertrude Lightstone Mittelmann, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WJZ. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Saw you were editing Rosa Bonheur a lot. Do you think you know any facts that you could add to Auguste Bonheur? It's new. Hafspajen (talk) 11:50, 24 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll see what I can find. Thanks for the notification. Coldcreation (talk) 12:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Richard Diebenkorn may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
million.html All 43 Works From Bunny Mellon’s Collection Sell at Sotheby’s Auction], New York Times]]</ref>
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hard-edge painting may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
was in 1959 that Langsner and art historian Peter Selz originated the phrase "hard-edge painting"] to describe the colors, shapes and style of abstract expressionist painting on the West Coast and
I have just blocked Minato ku (talk·contribs) for a clear 3RR-violation on Paris, but I have to warn you too – while you didn't get beyond the count of 3, you too were clearly edit-warring, and I cannot think that the POV and sourcing issue you were disagreeing over with Minato ku was of such a kind that blanket reverts (rather than, for instance, attempts at compromise edits or edits synthesizing both sets of statements in question) would have been the only solution, so this was clearly not constructive behaviour on either side. Fut.Perf.☼ 21:05, 16 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Modernist has conveyed a willingness to finish what we started on Gauguin, possibly this coming week. Check out Talk:Paul Gauguin and my sandbox for more. Nonc01 (talk) 16:47, 23 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since you suggested paring down the correspondence section of the draft, I was wondering if you had a preference in mind, such as removing one or abridging the longest ones? Nonc01 (talk) 02:27, 25 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Coldcreation:
I really appreciate your edits and careful work on the Paris article; you're one of the few calm voices on the project. I did notice that for the tourism statistics, you link to the 2013 report from the Visitor and Convention Bureau, which gives 2012 figures. Did you know that the 2014 report is on line, with the 2013 figures? You can find it on the Convention and Tourism site. Please keep up the good work! SiefkinDR (talk) 12:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that SiefkinDR. I had a feeling the updated version might be online but didn't have time to search for it. I will now. Coldcreation (talk) 12:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC
Dear Coldcreation,
I would like to add my thanks to the above by SiefkinDR: as a result of your bringing in these references, hard work of many hours by THEPROMENADER✎✓ , Siefkin & a couple others will not be contested & automatically removed. You're cool!
Indeed, the image you reverted to is better. But its PD status is more than doubtful. See here. Cheers, — Racconish 📥 11:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw that. Perhaps I will upload that image to wiki as Non-free media with a use rationale for a couple of articles. That image needs to be seen. Coldcreation (talk) 12:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes and no. Initially, I thought like you. But if we have a decent PD image, do we really need a fair use one ? I leave it up to you... Cheers, — Racconish 📥 13:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For a multitude of contributions to subjects in the fine arts...Modernist (talk) 13:35, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thank you very much Modernist. This is highly appreciated, especially so since it comes from you. Coldcreation (talk) 13:45, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 5[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lycée Pierre-Corneille, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pierre Dumont. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 5 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Noticed you removed a lot of them. Is there any reason behind it? I know Smallbones dislike them, but I think they do add to the articles. If there is any discussion on it I want to add it there too. Hafspajen (talk) 14:22, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for bringing up this issue Hafspajen. I would love to know where this can be discussed. The problem with those external media Smarthistory videos, and their respective templates, is that they are all too often placed within the main body of text of a given article. They belong in External links. Occasionally, they reproduce images that are already in an article. In addition, Smarthistory adds references to these videos that appear in the Reference section of the article, when they are not at all references for the article content. The result of the latter is that the word Smarthistory appears 10 or more times within a given article (always bluelinked). This, and the placing of the templates within the main text, is a spam-like tactic probably used to drum up business for Smarthistory. This type of vandalism (or at least it can be seen as such) needs to stop. Whereas a small block of links in the External links section of an article, where I've place some of these templates, is eventually acceptable, the vast majority of smarthistory templates are still located scattered throughout the main body of text in many articles still. Coldcreation (talk) 14:44, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I get that now. OK, thanks for the explanation. I guess where the only problem is that it is the same picture, we could just change the image, (if that's the main problem in some places, not the overlink). Hafspajen (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's not the main problem. The main problem is the placement of large External media infoboxes in the main article or See also sections, rather than where it belongs, in the External link section; in addition to the problem of over-linking the name Smarthistory, and the abuse of references relating to Smarthistory. Are you the editor who has added these templates everywhere? Coldcreation (talk) 16:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pablo Picasso may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
Trinidad'',<ref name="CatRez"/> a series of names honouring various saints and relatives.<ref>[http://picasso.shsu.edu/ The name on his baptismal certificate differs slightly from the name on
Your reverts [5] and [6] contradict MOS:CAPS. Namely, MOS:DOCTCAPS and MOS:GENRECAPS. The general rule "consistently capitalized in sources" does not apply either, since dictionaries do not capitalize these terms (at most, they sometimes say: "often capitalized"), and there is no rational reason to do so. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 01:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know the general rules linked above and understand them perfectly well. Art movements, however, are somewhat of an exception. Most of the relevant literature (in art related books, museums and so on) capitalizes art movements. For this reason, Wikipedia users accustomed to writing and editing articles within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts tend to write art movements begin with a capital letters. Thanks for your understanding. Coldcreation (talk) 18:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you please explain why this exception is needed? And why, for example, you did not capitalize "pointillism"? — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure Mikhail Ryazanov. Pointillism is a technique of painting used by the Neo-Impressionists. Techniques of painting are not capitalized. The Divisionists, too, used a similar technique of patterns to form images, though with larger cube-like brushstrokes. That is not very clear in the article about pointillism, but I will modify that text shortly. Finally, whether capitalization is needed or not for art movements I do not know. But in the art world that is the rule, rather than the exception. Coldcreation (talk) 03:28, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't get your point on the incident page - I did not complain about the image, I complained about the behaviour. You cannot roll someone back for good faith edits even if you are "guarding" a page. Can you explain more on the page? Hekerui (talk) 09:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I undid your perm request, it was on the wrong page; please feel free to add at the rollback requests page. — xaosfluxTalk 16:07, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — MusikAnimaltalk 21:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Georges Braque, 1922, Paris, photograph by Man Ray..jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Georges Braque, 1922, Paris, photograph by Man Ray..jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:28, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Replaceable fair use File:Georges Braque, 1922, Paris, photograph by Man Ray..jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Georges Braque, 1922, Paris, photograph by Man Ray..jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your UNDO of another user's edits looks terrible on high resolution / wide format displays.
Please alternate the images so they do not stack up (ie., Arms and Armor should not display with Arts of Africa) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxdsg (talk • contribs) 19:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You must be mistaking me for another user. If not, link the revert to which you refer. Coldcreation (talk) 21:47, 10 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
His name was already in that article, I just made sure that it would link to mine. If you're sure that he wasn't represented there, by all means, delete him. WQUlrich (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks WQUlrich. It's not a problem, I was just wondering, as I would love to read more about the exhibition. Coldcreation (talk) 21:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see...maybe some confusion (although the link leads to Paul Huet). The placement of Martin's name does make it look like an afterthought, and he's not really as notable as the others (and somewhat earlier). Maybe it's in that reference #4?. It seems to be the basis for the article. WQUlrich (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was just looking at your user page. When it comes to art, I'm the one who should be asking you questions!!. I've done almost four-hundred articles on relatively obscure painters (most of whom I had never heard of before) but it's just something I came up with to kill time and keep my brain working (I'm retired). Suggestions, comments and criticism are welcomed. WQUlrich (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much Mary Mark Ockerbloom. I do appreciate the star. Come back in a few days... many more images are on there way to Wiki (all published before 1923 of course). :-) Coldcreation (talk) 09:20, 5 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just discovered a few more works by Laurencin (today) that were published in 1913. I will be posting those soon. Coldcreation (talk) 18:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 4[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brooklyn Bridge (Gleizes), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page La Chasse. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Coldcreation, "Totem" is not included in Catalogue raisonné of his painting. It will be better to erase it or to change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.89.75.248 (talk) 16:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Provenance: Mme Marie-Louise Miklos, épouse de l'artiste. Take it up on the Gustave Miklos Talk page. Coldcreation (talk) 18:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I reverted you. The new picture was an accurate scan from a modern book. It is the original that was not correct. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've just uploaded and posted an image of the painting with more accurate colors. That previous image from a book is far too saturated. Oil paints do not exist in those colors. Coldcreation (talk) 11:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's still better than the previous one. And far higher res. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Adam Cuerden will make an attempt to feature the portrait of Rosa Bonheur.
Just letting you know it because you are the main editor on the article. This is why he put the image in the infobox, because it will give it a better chance, and he will now start working on the image restoration. Hope it is OK? Also see my talk. Hafspajen (talk) 10:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, excellent. I just removed one row of black pixels from bottom and right of the that photo. These pixels were not needed in the image and in fact were a distraction. They were visible at ordinary scale as thin black lines. Now they are no longer. Coldcreation (talk) 11:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hafspajen, I just checked the original source of the photo, the black pixels are not there, so it must have been an artifact that came with the capturing of the image. Coldcreation (talk) 11:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That was, of course, going to be part of the restoration. Let's leave the crop for now, but we'll want to revert it eventually, as the original image linked to should be the original, after all, not a modification. =)
[Added after edit conflict] That said, I wish Hafspajen wouldn't make everything justified solely by FPs; there's far better reasons than that for the change, and I think "I want an FP for the article" is, generally speaking, a weak argument if not backed by other reasons. The Legion of Honour photo, while good in the abstract, is a small half-toned rather faded copy. I think it's generally better to lead with your best image (it encourages clicking through, for instance, as if they see the first image is good, they're more likely to check the others. In this case, the best image is either the Klumpke painting, or the Disdéri photo; all other things being equal, I prefer the camera, as artistic portraits can be a little inaccurate. We also have a section on her gaining the Legion of Honour which I originally put said Legion of Honour photo as near as possible to. Adam Cuerden(talk) 11:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As stated above, the rows of black pixels on the bottom and right of the image (now removed) are not present in the source image. And so no need to revert back to them. Coldcreation (talk) 11:28, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's because of a flaw in the JPEG codec. Progressive saving as JPEG degrades an image, so I'll be editing from the one nearest the original capture, repeating your crop. But restoration requires documenting exactly what you used as your source. Adam Cuerden(talk) 11:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You sort out image guys. Adam, let me just say a word= Pedro. Coldcreation is an excellent editor, very reasonable and it is fair to involve him in this decision. Hafspajen (talk) 11:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, Coldcreation - Adam has like 100 images that were FP nominated and passed, if anyone he will succeded to fix this. Hafspajen (talk) 11:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I perfectly agree, Hafs. I'm just explaining JPEG's lossy nature to him, as the reasons for not keeping the crop are nothing to do with the merits of the crop - which is 100% justified - but because JPEG is lossy, and I need to have the exact file I worked from uploaded, which has to be the least edited copy to avoid JPEG's progressive degredation. Really, Google Art Project captures should be PNGs. I didn't think I was having a fight with Coldstream... Adam Cuerden(talk) 11:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let me know if you need any help restoring the image, and link me to the nomination once it's up. Coldcreation (talk) 11:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I rather think Adam Cuerden, that if you should co-nom it - it should be with Coldcreation, not me. He should be the one credited too. He was involved with specifically the image before. I just put that into the article. Hafspajen (talk) 14:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
DYK for The Cubist Painters, Aesthetic Meditations[edit]
This entry was for a school project. Please allow it to stay up for at least 2 weeks because my professor needs to check that I did the assignment. Fix it if you must after that date. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Southshoresiren (talk • contribs) 00:02, 8 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In 20 minutes you could have that text all fixed up. See The Cubist Painters, Aesthetic Meditations if you need further citations.There are plenty there that discuss Laurencin. (To see how to post citations, click on edit). Just make sure non of what you write is your personal opinion, without having a source to back it up. Then post it on the Laurencin page. I look forward to reading it. Coldcreation (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hate to say this, but I think that not italicizing the newspapers, but italicizing the article titles is wrong. Adam Cuerden(talk) 05:04, 16 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're entitled to your opinion. However, as explained in the edit summary, consistency with the Bibliography section is the key. Many (unfortunately not all) of the citations are written this way too. Coldcreation (talk) 05:11, 16 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Cubist Painters, Aesthetic Meditations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pierre Dumont. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 17 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Coldcreation, I don't understand the reason for your revert of my edit at Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis. On my screen, a separation between A Day and the gallery turns the gallery into five lines of five pics each, whereas on my screen your revert makes it 3-5-5-5-5-2.
I know Hafs uses a wider screen than my so-called 'standard screen,' so that may be part of the explanation – ?? Sca (talk) 14:12, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Huh? Coldcreation is a friend of mine, who was just trying to help, did nothing but revert to pre-Lotje version, as it was before.
Hafs! I wasn't being hostile. Just asking. Sca (talk)
I don't really know why is that happened on your screen ... I thought we were happy with that version. Could be that a painting crashing the gallery 3+2 under sounds like it, I will now try clear. Hafspajen (talk) 14:21, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How's now?
Yes, looks fine here. Thanks – and sorry if someone took the question the wrong way.
(I'm not acquainted with the references problem.) Sca (talk) 15:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've never seen that spacer - thing before (I have nothing against it though), but yes, my revert was primarily for the references, they were fine before Lotje's intervention. Lotje's semi-automated reference aid makes a mess of perfectly fine references. For some reason Lotje calls them bare references, or bare links, which they are not at all. I've reverted several of Lotje's edits in other articles as well, for the same reason. Coldcreation (talk) 14:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Images in the gallery collectively do have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject.
Galleries are not discuraged. Please see also this discussion here, Talk:Charles Marion Russell.
Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). However, the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject.
Image use policy say: Sometimes a picture may benefit from a size other than the default; see the Manual of Style for guidance.
Manual of style: **As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). 'If an exception to the general rule is warranted', forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding.
The exception from the general rule is most art and art related articles that they do fall into this cathegory, and they are this exception to the general rule .
If someone is not familiar with image policy, shouldn't edit art articles, and I am seriously considering having a conference with all our regular art editors about hyow to handle this disuption the above mentioned editor is causing on art articles. Maybe on Wikiproject. Noticed she was tring to cause disruption on The Cubist Painters, Aesthetic Meditations this time. Before it was here and here. See previous discussions (water of a duck's back) both here and here page. And pretending she has no idea about it. Hafspajen (talk) 14:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm more concerned with her use of the semi-automated program Li/reFill to change perfectly fine references to nonsense. Coldcreation (talk) 14:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For all your work on the visual arts and imagery. This barnstar is awarded to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated. Hafspajen (talk) 16:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But I can notice it everywhere... on art articles... Hafspajen (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 19[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Soldier at a Game of Chess, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Architectonic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 19 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the New York Frick Collection, two portraits by Holbein hang facing each other on the same wall of the Living Hall, one depicting Thomas Cromwell, the other Thomas More, whose execution he had procured.
I'm trying to figure out how two portraits could face each other but be hung on the same wall. The only thing I can think of is that the wall is curved. Do you have any way of checking this? CorinneSD (talk) 04:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi CorinneSD, Looking in google images, it look like the two portraits are profiles (almost), so that the two subjects appear to look towards each other, even though on the same wall. In addition, it does look like the wall is slightly curved. :-) Coldcreation (talk) 05:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I found it! You're right! It said Henry Frick had a sense of humor in placing the two paintings like that. CorinneSD (talk) 23:41, 20 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation - I thought French last names starting with "de" or "du" generally were not capitalized (the "de" or "du", I mean), or is that an individual choice? In the article on Théophile Gautier most names do not have the "de" or "du" capitalized, but in the fifth paragraph in Théophile Gautier#Life and times I found "Jehan Du Seigneur", and in the section Théophile Gautier#Influences, I found "Maxime Du Camp", who has an article, and in that article the "Du" is capitalized. It just looks strange. CorinneSD (talk) 23:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi CorinneSD, I was under the same impression as you. In the French wiki articles for both Jehan Du Seigneur and Maxime Du Camp, the Du is capitalized. I can only assume this is correct. At French wiki they are very strict about capitalization. Nothing is capitalized unless it needs to be. For example, a recent article I wrote, The Cubist Painters, Aesthetic Meditations, was partially translated and posted at French wiki, titled Les Peintres cubistes. Méditations esthétiques, even though the original publication uses Caps. Those are the règles de typographie they use. I'm still not sure why "Du" should be capitalized though. :-) Coldcreation (talk) 04:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Coldcreation, for the WIKIPEDIA article on Abstract Expressionism to present a list of 100 artists as being: “Significant artists whose mature work defined American Abstract Expressionism” seems to be grossly overstated and very subjective, without presenting anything to validate the statement. Note that Albert Alcalay, Charles Alston, Alice Baber, William Baziotes, Norman Bluhm, Louise Bourgeois, Ernest Briggs, James Brooks, Fritz Bultman, Jack Bush, and Alexander Calder and many more on the list cannot be considered as Major Abstract Expressionist Artists whose mature work defined American Abstract Expressionism. Calder belonged to the “Kinetic Art Movement” and the others played no significant role and were minor contributors to the Abstract Expressionist Movement. Because only a small number of the 100 artists on the list actually defined AAE, I requested (on the Talk Page of the Article) that the introduction to the “List of abstract expressionists Major Artists” be changed to read: "Significant artists some of whose major work helped to define American Abstract Expressionism.” Please consider entering this discussion as I believe this needs to be corrected. (I do thank you, for "correcting" me, and now I believe something else need to be corrected.) Sirswindon (talk) 22:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was just skimming the article on Joseph Halévy when I saw "Ecoles des Hautes Etudes" at the end of the third paragraph. Don't "Ecole" and "Etudes" need accents over the initial "e"? CorinneSD (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see that you've already corrected it. Does that mean that the French do not capitalize all the main words of the name of an institution, as we do in English? If so, that's surprising to me. CorinneSD (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow. Interesting. Well, regarding the use of caps, English is about half-way between French and German, isn't it? Don't the Germans use more caps than we do? Regarding the French preference for lower-case, I wonder where that preference stems from. Could it be a reaction against official-looking and -sounding things after the French Revolution? Or could it be a holdover from Latin? Does Latin use upper and lower case, or does it have only one case? CorinneSD (talk) 17:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not sure about German or Latin. Nor about the history of the French lexicon regarding upper- and lowercase. Also strange are the quote marks used in French, such as « these ». Or even spacing when writing divers punctuation, such as : I tried looking into the history of these orthographic et typographic conventions, which differ in Canada by the way, and found little. I think these norms go back to the Middle Ages, and then the time of the first printing presses (with led letters and wooden case boxes), and now depend on the Référence Lexique des règles typographiques en usage à l'Imprimerie nationale. To confuse further, there is also a difference between uppercase (majuscule) and capital letters in French. Coldcreation (talk) 04:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What? What's the difference between uppercase and capital letters (in French)? That's a new one to me. Did you know why letters are called upper case and lower case? You probably do. The upper case, or drawer, of the cabinet that held the lead letters for hand typesetting contained the capital letters and the lower case held the small letters. As I understand it, German nouns are normally capitalized. See German orthography#Spelling of nouns. CorinneSD (talk) 23:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes CorinneSD, Capitale et majuscule are not the same thing in French (nor in English by the way). Majuscules are bigger. For example: « LONGTEMPS MARCEL S’EST COUCHÉ DE BONNE HEURE » is written in capital letters, but the first "L" and the "M" of Marcel are in majuscule. Written with a computer they all look alike, however, this phrase should look like this: « Longtemps Marcel s’est couché de bonne heure ». An example in English: I LIKE CorinneSD BECAUSE SHE IS VERY CURIOUS ABOUT THINGS, should appear as: I like CorinneSD because she is very curious about things. :-) Coldcreation (talk) 04:46, 30 April 2015
(UTC)
Oh... Interesting. I always thought the French word "majuscule" meant "capital [letter]". It is a French word, and I haven't heard it used in English. How would you express it in English? Typographers probably have a word or phrase for it. If "majuscule" (in French) does not mean "capital letter" (to the French), do they have another word for "capital letter"? Maybe this style (the style of your examples) is more common in French. We don't see it very often in English. CorinneSD (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Coldcreation, I'm writing to you about your article on the Académie de La Palette.I have gathered from family sources that my grand-father Raymond Colin (1886-1929), who was a painter, was for a very short time director of La Palette, in the first half of 1914. This assumption is based on the fact that his address at that time was 18 rue du Val-de-Grâce, where the Académie de La Palette was located, and his occupation is stated in an official document as "directeur d'une académie de peinture". His wife also received in the spring of 1914 a postcard send to "Madame Colin, La Palette, rue du Val-de-Grâce, Paris". And although Raymond Colin never became famous, and never departed from figurative painting, he was well acquainted with Dunoyer de Segonzac and Mondrian, among others. Now my question is, have you by any chance ever come across Raymond Colin's name in any documents related to La Palette? Best regards. Acdtfr (talk) 15:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Acdtfr, I've heard much more about Paul Colin than Raymond Colin. Is there any relation? I'll have to do some research to see what I can find on Raymond Colin. Perhaps you could write a Wiki article on the topic of your grand-father. I for one would be very interested. Coldcreation (talk) 04:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Coldcreation, Thank you for your answer. Raymond Colin has no connection whatsoever with Paul Colin. I'm actually trying to write some sort of biography on Raymond Colin, but it will take me months, if not years, to complete it. The same goes for a Wiki article. Briefly, Raymond Colin, who was born in Lavaur (Tarn), stayed in Holland during First Wolrd War. His wife was a Dutch pianist who performed first under the name of Mies Penning, then Marie Colin, playing solo or with the Trio Parisien. After the war, they moved into a studio in the Cité Nicolas Poussin, 242 boulevard Raspail, in Paris. Raymond died while staying in Barcelona and, after his death, Marie Colin organised some small scale art exhibitions in the studio. Afterwards, she broke up with the painting milieu, but remained a friend of Conrad Kickert until his death. A short article on Raymond Colin can be found in the Dutch newspaper Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant http://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/results?coll=ddd&query=%22Raymond+Colin%22&cql[]=%28date+_gte_+%2201-01-1923%22%29&cql[]=%28date+_lte_+%2231-12-1923%22%29. Acdtfr (talk) 10:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that information. I'll check out the link, and see what else I can find. Coldcreation (talk) 10:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:X-ray composite based on Jean Metzinger's Soldier at a Game of Chess.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:X-ray composite based on Jean Metzinger's Soldier at a Game of Chess.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:36, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Possibly unfree File:Jean Metzinger, Soldier at a Game of Chess, X-ray composite.jpg[edit]
Hi Coldcreation ! May I ask you why you removed the picture I have added on the Archipenko article ? I am a beginner here but I thought I had followed the rules and instructions properly... Thank you. --Marianne-Liem (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes sure Marianne-Liem. I removed the image of that sculpture from the Alexander Archipenko article, because the sculpture is not by Archipenko. It is by Jacques Lipchitz. Also, some of the images you've uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, by artists who died less than 71 years ago (such as Jean Metzinger, Fernand Léger and Lipchitz), should have been uploaded to Wikipedia, not Commons. Coldcreation (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All right, thank you for such information, and sorry for that mistake ! I will look at that aspect more closely from now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianne-Liem (talk • contribs) 19:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Jean Metzinger, Soldier at a Game of Chess, X-ray composite.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Jean Metzinger, Soldier at a Game of Chess, X-ray composite.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:The Art of JAMA III.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The Art of JAMA III.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Provincial Letters also received praise. For example, Charles Perrault wrote of the Letters: "Everything is there—purity of language, nobility of thought, solidity in reasoning, finesse in raillery, and throughout an agrément not to be found anywhere else."
I wasn't sure of the meaning of agrément, so I used the Google translation feature, and it gave just one word, "approval". But, to me, "approval" doesn't quite make sense in this sentence, and I was wondering if you could provide a better translation. CorinneSD (talk) 00:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi CorinneSD, the word is related to pleasure or satisfaction, but I would have to read the French sentence to be sure. Literally, it could mean congeniality, amenity, approval, acclaim, endorsement, approbation, authorization, pleasantness, congeniality, niceness, or amenity, depending on the context. (See here). In the past, I've found translations, even in books published by the most reputable historians, where the meaning of the sentence turned out to mean the exact opposite of what was meant in French. So I will try to find the original sentence and get back to you, to confirm either way. Coldcreation (talk) 04:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I found the original version of Volume 2, 3 and 4. Vol 1, cited in the article, appears more difficult to find. So in the absence of the original text, I would say the word agrément in this case means pleasantness or geniality. Coldcreation (talk) 05:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, Coldcreation! I think you're right. Either of those would fit perfectly. CorinneSD (talk) 13:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Georges Braque, 1922, Paris, photograph by Man Ray..jpg[edit]
Hi Lotje. Images of works by Man Ray (photographs, paintings, assemblages, etc) are still under copyright protection, unless otherwise published prior to 1923. To the best of my knowledge, the photo of Braque was not published before 1923. Some of the photos of Duchamp by Man Ray were indeed. Unless explicitly stated, by cc 2.0 or 3.0 exceptions, such as the image of Erik Satie at Gallica, Bibliothèque nationale de France, listed as domaine public, and perhaps the portrait of William Zorach from the Library of Congress ("No known restrictions on publication"), Man Ray's works should generally not be uploaded to Commons. Coldcreation (talk) 05:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: some of the photos of Duchamp by Man Ray probably should have been uploaded to Wikipedia U.S. (if published before 1923), rather than Commons, unless there is proof of no copyright restriction in the source country (France). Coldcreation (talk) 05:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, that answers my question. imo, this is a perfect example of how these copyright laws in Europe screw up logical uploading. In fact, on the German wikipedia, there is even an open letter from Wikipedia to the members of the European Parliament to maintain the FOP, which, somehow proves, the copyright issues should be seen within a global use and not being restricted as it is now. Knowledge should not have frontiers, not even on the internet. Lotje (talk) 12:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation - I'm reading the article on John Mandeville, and I've come across what look like two French names: "Johains a le Barbe or Jehan a la Barbe" in the section John Mandeville#Contemporary corroboration. I wondered why there was no accent on the "a". Should there be? Or did they not use accents at that time? CorinneSD (talk) 22:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes CorinneSD, another good catch. There should be an accent on the "a", à la barbe. And it's not le barbe, it's la barbe. Accents were used back then (though much was written in Latin). Even had they not, today it should be written correctly. Coldcreation (talk) 03:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Pablo Picasso and his sister Lola, c.1889.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Pablo Picasso and his sister Lola, c.1889.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Portrait of Pablo Picasso, 1908-1909, anonymous photographer, Musée Picasso, Paris...jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Portrait of Pablo Picasso, 1908-1909, anonymous photographer, Musée Picasso, Paris...jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pierrot may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
[[(Pierrot et Arlequin),|thumb|upright|[[Paul Cézanne]]: ''Mardi gras (Pierrot and Harlequin)'', 1888,
et Arlequin),|thumb|upright|[[Paul Cézanne]]: ''Mardi gras (Pierrot and Harlequin)'', 1888, [[Pushkin Museum[[, Moscow]]
(1922; voice and piano; lyrics by [[Bliss Carman]]) [see above under '''[[#Poetry|Poetry]]''']).
Bonjour Cold Creation,
Although I usually agree with your editing interventions - you're sharp! - I do not agree here:(
A title in original language used in a foreign text has to respect the spelling etc. of the original. Please give me the rule why Salon d'automne in French must be written Salon d'Automne in a text in English.
Cordialement, --Blue Indigo (talk) 13:29, 22 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bonjour Blue Indigo, the name Salon d'Automne, just as Salon des Indépendants and innumerable other terms, titles, names, etc.), even though French, when written in English are capitalized. This standard operating procedure is practiced by museums, curators, auction houses, galleries, critics, art historians, English wiki editors, and so on. See too, for example, the French website (in english) for this salon: Société du Salon d'Automne. Coldcreation (talk) 01:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Thanks for all the help, and I see your name against many of the original file uploads. Impressed. Ceoil (talk) 06:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To say thanks for all the edits, tunes and help; the page has come on a lot. Am I right, can you see, about the locations of the two other versions cast by Gaugain? Private collections as far as I can make out; and both changed hands recently. Ceoil (talk) 17:28, 4 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excellent question. I'm not sure where these casts are now. During public auctions they were not necessarily acquired by private collectors. Museums, galleries, public and private institutions, and so on, also bid on lots that may interest them. Sometimes the identity of buyers is disclosed (other times not). Until the current whereabouts of these cast are known, it would be imprudent to assume they were purchased by private collectors. But it's even more complicated than that. This cast of Oviri, for example, is documented as forming part of the Fondation Beyeler, Riehen (2015). But I found no record of it in the collection of works at Fondation Beyeler. That is not to say it's not there. But it may have already changed hands. I hope this helps. Coldcreation (talk) 17:59, 4 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, after close examination, that Artsy/ Beyeler photo is the Orsay version. It was there for an exhibition (listed in the Oviri article under Recent exhibitions). Let me see what I can find about the other versions. It may take a couple of days. Coldcreation (talk) 18:04, 4 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, helps a lot. Also, not seeing any rush needed here. Ceoil (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thought you might enjoy reading the latest entries in this discussion on Talk:Saxons[11] and, of course, the edit just before this one by the same editor. Corinne (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's just entertainingly silly. Thanks for the link Corinne. I might join the discussion if (s)he persists. Coldcreation (talk) 05:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. Not quite sure what you were doing here; you put back in a mistake in an ISBN i had corrected, and added back a whole lot of Unicode control characters, which i had also removed, and unformatted the poem from blockquote. Is there a reason you think we should not be formatting the quote according to the MOS guidelines? Apart from anything else, it does display better with blockquote.... Cheers, LindsayHello 21:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Lindsay. The problem is that your edit modified something that made all the headers and subheaders appear in the article like this ===Utopian communities=== (showing ===), while they disappeared from the Index. If you can fix that problem feel free to do so. I was unable, so I reverted. Coldcreation (talk) 02:38, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How strange. It didn't display that way for me...i'll take a look in a couple of minutes and see if i can work out what happened. Cheers, LindsayHello 14:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think i've sorted it; take a look, let me know if it's displaying incorrectly for you again? Cheers, LindsayHello 14:52, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You solved the problem. It looks good. Thanks. Coldcreation (talk) 16:21, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 8[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Woman with Black Glove, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ocher. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
') published in 1913], Peter Read (Translator), University of California Press, 25 Oct. 2004]</ref><ref name="Chipp, Selz">[https://books.google.es/books?id=UZ4Gu7a7V9UC&pg=PA220 Herschel
Hello, I've seen you reverted my changes. I have made an argument in the Edit section which I invite you to read. The actual numbers given on the encyclopedia are proven to be untrue and thus cannot be maintained. What do you think we should do, since we do not have a single source (a single link) but a logical deduction based on several links ? --LinguisticStudent (talk) 17:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC) LinguisticStudentReply[reply]
LinguisticStudent, the link you provided states the size of one wing of the museum: the Hellenistic, Etruscan, and Roman galleries (housing over 5,300 objects in more than 30,000 square feet). This is only a small section of the entire museum. Coldcreation (talk) 18:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
License tagging for File:Jean Metzinger, invitation card, Léonce Rosenberg, Galerie de L'Effort Moderne, January 1919.jpg[edit]
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Varvara Stepanova, Henri Le Fauconnier, Jean Metzinger, Paris 1921.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Varvara Stepanova, Henri Le Fauconnier, Jean Metzinger, Paris 1921.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2016 will be successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 23:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Modernist, and best wishes to you for a prosperous 2016 full of health, wealth and wisdom. Coldcreation (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wishing you a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Bring on the Champagne! Hafspajen (talk) 09:26, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Hafspajen. The Champagne certainly poured, and I hope it will for you all year long... :-) Coldcreation (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation! Happy New Year! I have just started to read the article on the Passenger pigeon, in response to a request for a copy-edit at WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, and I've come across something I've got to ask you about. At the very beginning of the article, it says that the name of the bird came from the French word passager, which means "passing by". Is that correct? When I use the Google translate feature, it says it means "passenger". What is the correct etymology for "passenger" in the bird's name? Corinne (talk) 02:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Happy New Year to you too Corinne. Your question is a good one and a difficult to answer. Both translations in French are correct. "Passing by" is applicable since, originally, the bird's passed by during their migration period. And passenger, as in 'traveler', is also applicable and more closely related to the the French Tourte voyageuse. I would base myself on what the sources write (Fuller 2014 and Harper 2012). Sorry I couldn't have been of more help. Coldcreation (talk) 07:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. Given your contributions to related articles (I also made some edits to the Man Ray page), I thought you might find this article draft also of interest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dadaglobe
I am waiting for review of the submission; I welcome any suggestions or edits you might have to improve the page in the meantime. This is only my second Wiki article and I'm still learning the ropes.Gaw54 (talk) 18:37, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Coldcreation for contributing to the Dadaglobe page. I took your lead and added a few more external links. I intend to add links to this page on other pages (like the page on Dada and Tzara) but am anxiously awaiting a review and acceptance of my submission. Any suggestions as to how this might be facilitated? The Dadaglobe show in Zurich is opening this week and it would be nice to have the page live by that time. Gaw54 (talk) 18:35, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gaw54, I would just go ahead and publish the article. No need to wait for a review. I understand the article is a work in progress, but so too are millions of other article at Wikipedia. The article looks good. I've never gone through the review process before publishing article (nor even for my first articles). If you need help publishing it I can help out, or even do it for you. Let me know... Coldcreation (talk) 23:16, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Coldcreation. I'm obviously missing something here, since I thought that submitting my article for publication necessitated a review. Yes, I would LOVE to have it published, recognizing that it will continue to develop. Your assistance in publishing it would be much appreciated. Gaw54 (talk) 23:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. I am trying to replace the Picabia image you uploaded to Dadaglobe page with the Dadamax image you uploaded for the Max Ernst page. While the Picabia work was not made explicitly for Dadaglobe (it was published earlier), Ernst's collaged self portrait commonly referred to as Dadamax was. I am having trouble figuring out how to link that image; your assistance would be much appreciated. Thanks.Gaw54 (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, it is Ernst's self-portrait you uploaded for his Wiki page (also known as The Punching Ball). (It appears that you and I have many common interests: Dada, Man Ray, Ernst, Picabia, etc.)
Yes indeed Gaw54. I added the Ernst image to the article. Would you like me to post the article? Coldcreation (talk) 23:35, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, please post the article. It looks great. Thanks!Gaw54 (talk) 23:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Will do so, give me a minute or two. By the way, nice work. Coldcreation (talk) 23:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's up and running Gaw54. Congratulations. Again, good work. Feel free to continue improving the article and creating new ones. Coldcreation (talk) 23:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I removed Dada from the See also section since Dada is already mentioned and linked in the first sentence of the article. Coldcreation (talk) 23:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That makes sense. Thanks for all your help. You even beat me to adding categories! For future reference, how do I submit an article for publication without uploading it through the review process? Awaiting acceptance took more time than I thought it would. Gaw54 (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
First, type in the title of the article in "search". You will see "Showing results for... [your title, e.g. Dadaphone, this will be a redlink]". And "You may create the page "[article title]", but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered". Click on the redlink, then copy-paste your draft. Finally, click "Save page" at the bottom. Hope this helps. Feel free to contact me if further assistance is required, or if you need a quick review. Coldcreation (talk) 07:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello. About this revert, I ensure you that in French "Pardon" may also be used with this meaning. It's present in the page since a while, with nobody except you finding it out "wrong", so you should consider why. Cheers.--La femme de menage (talk) 14:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I added some sources in the talk pages before I saw your auto-revert, in case of need. --La femme de menage (talk) 14:37, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! I saw you uploaded an image of Acrobat and Young Harlequin. I was wondering if you know about its provenance: it is the Barnes collection now, but is it the same piece featured in these articles:
Good question MainlyTwelve. The articles you link to refer to another work by Picasso of the same title sold at Christie's London in 1988 (where the acrobat and harlequin are sitting). See here. As far as the provenance of the Barnes painting, it's a shame that information is not listed at their website. There may be more information online somewhere, not sure. Just out of curiosity, why do you ask? Coldcreation (talk) 22:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was going to write an article about the Barnes painting, but there are very few, or no sources available online. Thank you for your help!--MainlyTwelve (talk) 02:40, 30 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Demonstrating greater effects would require greater distances from the Earth and/or a larger gravitational source.[edit]
Greater distances (than for example the distance to a GPS satellite) do create a very marginal time dilatation compared to the time dilatation from earth to a GPS satellite.
The distance from the centre of mass is about 4 times.
The gravitation on the GPS is about 1/17.
The gravitational dilation by grafity is at the GPS hight is reduced to 1/17 of earth surface.
Going to infinity and beyond the gravitational dilation (of earth) would go to zero.
The gravitational effect from earth to GPS very little, infinity and beyond is 1/17th of that.
If the dilation is 17 Units at the earth surface.
It is about 1 Unit at the GPS level.
At infinity is wil be 0 Units.
I would think this does not demonstrate a greater effect.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orphism (art), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page L'Oiseau bleu. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ship-name italicization reversion in Art Deco article[edit]
Coldcreation, I see that you reverted my recent edit in the Art Deco article, in which I italicized the name of the ship SS Normandie (other than which I made no changes). My edit conforms to both Wikipedia style guidelines and standard English orthographical practice. I cannot figure out why the name of the Normandie would not be italicized, in the context in which I made the change. Please explain your reasoning, regarding your reversion of my edit. (And I apologize, for the use of this odd font. I have not intentionally chosen it, and I don't know why my message appears in (what seems to me to be) Courier font. My four-tilde signoff has failed to add my name, I apologize for this, as well. I am Catsmoke.) Thanks. 02:03, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, very much. I appreciate your willingness to listen, and to compromise. I wish you the best. Catsmoke (talk) 14:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for July 24[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Art Deco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jacques Doucet. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So how picture become notable if no one can see it. Above all, its Finalist picture of last year, and also FP and QI. And there are no stairs yet. --PetarM (talk) 09:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, why did you revert the classification to to chapter "Other artists"? I fully agree that he doesn't belong to the "Notable artists", but he belongs (based on the work he does) generally to the article about Abstract Expressionism. Regards, NORPpA (talk) 19:28, 20 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See edit summary at Abstract Expressionism. Coldcreation (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2017 will be successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Robert McClenon (talk) 19:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A painting is not a publication per se. For copyright purpose, the exhibition of a painting is not considered as as publication (see here). In order to claim PD-US, you must either establish that copies of the work (i.e. images of the artwork in books, periodicals, prints, or other publicly-available copies) were published anywhere in the world before 1909 ; or that copies of the work were published in the US before 1923 ; or that copies of the work were published elsewhere with a copyright notice compliant with the 1909 Copyright Act (see here cases 1, 2 and 3 for further explanations). Otherwise, please modify the file license as fair use.
The color reproduction of Le Cavalier arabe does not appear in the 1921 catalog which is only illustrated in black and white. I think the simplest would be to apply here the precautionary principle by simply claiming fair use and not PD-US. Thanks, — Racconish ☎ 13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm pretty sure it makes no difference whether the publication was black and white, vis avis color, for work reproduced before 1923. In other words, as long as the painting itself was published before 1923, the painting, even in color, is public domain in the U.S. Most images published before 1923 were in black and white (half-tone). Coldcreation (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll see if I can locate it. Not easy to find anything mentioned about that (looked earlier). Likewise, have not seen any mention of the obligation to only use B&W in these cases. A little short on time right now. Coldcreation (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not saying there is an obligation to use black and white but a need to be coherent. If you claim the reproduction of the painting published in 1921 in France is in the public domain in the US, then you should upload that reproduction and not a color photograph culled today from the musée d'art moderne de la ville de Paris. Again : if you do not have a firm basis for claiming this color photograph is PD US, I suggest you to simply change the file license from PD US to fair use. — Racconish ☎ 07:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your point is understood, coherence is important. As soon as I get a chance I will sift through the relevant texts on the matter (pertaining to reproductions of pre-1923 images, or any image of the same painting) and respond accordingly. Coldcreation (talk) 08:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bonjour Blue Indigo. You're welcome, but not following anyone around, and it wasn't an error per say, just no need to include the city, rien de plus. :-) Coldcreation (talk) 10:47, 10 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Cold Creation, I knew you were not "following me around", it was just a way to express myself with a smile, and am glad you were there to remove New York from the link. Now I feel more secure with the knowledge that you are there to catch whatever needs to be fixed. I always appreciate seeing your input and may one day call on you for help. I will title the new link Au secours !
The article Paris you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Paris for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Geojournal -- Geojournal (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
List of artists in the Armory Show: Difference between revisions[edit]
Hello Coldcreation, can you explain ? In what way was the link unconventional ? The first version was a link to the french Cecil Howard 's page, which was the only existing. Recently I did the english version, so I changed the link to that one. Marsange (talk) 08:25, 10 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Marsange, we only link like that in External links. Inter language wiki links look like this (click on edit to see): {{Ill|Cecil Howard|fr}} (though here it goes to a disambiguation page). Note, Cecil de Blaquiere Howard has an article in English Wikipedia, so the interlanguage link is not needed. Coldcreation (talk) 08:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Constantin Brancusi, Portrait of Mlle Pogany, 1912, Philadelphia Museum of Modern Art, Philadelphia.jpg listed for discussion[edit]
I viewed the Art Renewal Center (ARC) website and have been familiar with it for years. The problem is you placed the text in a list of art movements and styles, which the ARC is not. There may be some other place for it in the article, e.g., External links. Coldcreation (talk) 08:03, 10 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. Thanks for your message. I'm pleased to be able to talk about this edit,I'm just getting to know the system. My edit proposes that there is a concise definition of 'Abstract Painting'as art which does not refer to the visible world. This appears to be the historical and academically supported meaning.For example, Fauvism and cubism orphism rayism and much of futurism were representational in that they showed recognizable forms. The breakthrough to the abstract was fueled by a desire to create a new way of expressing abstract, spiritual, transcendental ideas.Paulaclarewilliams (talk) 22:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation – How are you? I hope you are well. Do you think the link added here is appropriate for Wikipedia? – Corinne (talk) 04:30, 28 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Corinne. All is well, and I hope for you too. Thanks for the link. I've never seen those photos before. I find them essentially quite humorous. I'll venture to guess that Maurice Guilbert (an amateur photographer) shot those images for fun. Toulouse seems to be enjoying himself. Also, adding to the humor; the name of the beach is plage de Crotoy. Crotte in French means scat (poop, feces). Wikipedia occasionally contains content that some viewers find offensive or objectionable. That is fine. I'm all for not censoring. However, per WP:SHIT, these images "should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner". Their omission, in this case, would not cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate. Too, there is already an overabundance of External links in the article (not linked to Google images). They need to be trimmed. I would therefore remove that link, as well as several others. Coldcreation (talk) 08:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your interesting reply. Would you mind removing the link? I don't want to get into any arguments. – Corinne (talk) 20:46, 28 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Coldcreation,
I just saw that you undid my edit concerning the possible execution date of the Mona Lisa. It would seem that in the main article the date of execution is not agreed by all experts : many explaining that it reflects Leonardo's late technique of after 1513.
I wanted to add references there but did not know how to do this. Please do let me know if I did anything wrong as I am new to the Wiki world and very keen to learn.
I'm sure you will agree that we should get these important matters as fair reflections of all that we know today.
Genevieve81 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genevieve81 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Genevieve81. Your "1513-16" was already implicit in the phrase "perhaps continuing until c. 1517". Coldcreation (talk) 02:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey do you think the page, Salvador Dali be semi-protected? It is now the target of unregistered vandals who deny that Catalan is even an ethnicity. --DewyBukiaPeters (talk) 13:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DewyBukiaPeters (talk • contribs)
I will stay neutral on this topic to avoid conflict of interest. Coldcreation (talk) 11:06, 10 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi. I think it is better not to break that short paragraph up into two stubby paragraphs. More importantly, the image is too low now on wide-screen formats, and it interferes with the image below it. Would you kindly return it back to the prior version? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2018 will be safe, successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 12:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Modernist, that was a nice surprise, and much appreciated!!! Coldcreation (talk) 13:24, 24 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To Coldcreation, best wishes to you and yours for a joyful holiday season and for the year ahead. Ewulp (talk) 00:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Ewulp, happy holidays and a great (and productive) 2018 to you!!! Coldcreation (talk) 01:00, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Season's greetings and all the best in the new year![edit]
Hi Coldcreation—I wish you the best in the new year and I wish you in general happy holidays! Bus stop (talk) 15:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was just thinking of you Ceoil. How funny is that? I haven't seen you around very much since all your hard work on van Gogh and Oviri. I guess we have not overlapped articles lately. I see you were quite active at Hours of Mary of Burgundy. Fine article. I wish you a happy holiday and great 2018. Coldcreation (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS. thanks for the video, I enjoyed it. :-) Coldcreation (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Same to you. I watch and learn from the best Coldcreation. The VA community on wiki is small but focused and tight, I think we bounce off each other just fine. Ceoil (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A page you started (Composition for "Jazz") has been reviewed![edit]
Wikipedia editor Abishe just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Hello Coldcreation: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 17:21, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks BoringHistoryGuy, and best wishes to you and your loved ones for a prosperous and rewarding 2018. Coldcreation (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is not distruptive editing, it 's just nobody talks at the Talk page. Got no responces. What to do? Τζερόνυμο (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Τζερόνυμο, I would just to wait a while. Or, be bold, and we'll see what other editors say/do later. Up to you. I won't revert for now. Coldcreation (talk) 07:51, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will wait a couple of days more and see what happens. Hopefully, someone will comment. If not, I suppose I can proceed. Thanx. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 07:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw your reversion of my edits on this page. I thought I had left the meaning intact by only deleting the words 'ironically' and 'obviously' and switching from the passive to the active voice, but apparently not. However, those two words do not belong in an encyclopedia unless they're part of a quote or paraphrasing somebody's opinion with attribution. Irony is often a matter of opinion (I don't think that Degas' use of colors was ironic in this situation), and obviously shouldn't be used because it's condescending and the situation is not likely to be obvious to 99% of Wikipedia's readers, who may not know what Impressionism is, or much about art at all, but are trying to learn. Can you please rewrite the sentence without the words 'ironically' and 'obviously' and keep the meaning intact. Thanks. Ira, Ira Leviton (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, and thank you for re-adding the image of Guernica to the museum and Madrid pages, which have since been once-again reverted. What's the best way to go forward? The idea that the museum can be represented on Wikipedia without an image of its most honored and well-known artwork seems obvious, as does the images use representing Madrid when it discusses the cities artwork. Guernica is a world-icon, a triumph of spirit, and probably the best known work of art by Spain's best known artist. Leaving it off these pages, and letting a link do for encyclopedic coverage (which is easily missed) does disservice to readers who are planning their trips to Madrid and its national treasures. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:41, 17 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is the kind of honorable work that makes contributing to Wikipedia so worthwhile. Thank you, and if Picasso were alive today I suspect he'd first find a new 20-something mistress and then thank you as well. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The objections on the two pages seem to center on the rationale used on the form. Is it possible to edit the reasoning and shape it to the pages involved? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Randy Kryn: I'm pretty sure the rationale used on the form is not the main problem. That said, once everyone calms down, I will revise the form, and the relevant articles, to include specific commentary on the work. Coldcreation (talk) 17:16, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, some editors are holding to the unexact letter of the law. Your surprisingly simple but near-perfect work around on the museum page is one nobody can object to. Nice work. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:40, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please (pretty please with a Jimbo Wales/Larry Sanger dynamic-duo brownie on top), can you upload an image of Frida Kahlo's Memory, the Heart to be used on the Wikipedia article Memory, the Heart. I've tried numerous times and it won't upload for me, and then, just yesterday, my "Pictures" file won't even connect with the upload button (it goes to my "Documents" file, which makes no sense). Thanks much. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:58, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so very much. I've been asking around for help in uploading the image since the page was created on Valentine's Day. It picks up plenty of views a day, and what a painting that is, probably the best rendition of a broken heart in art (do you know of any others? I put up a category 'category:Broken heart' around the same time). Much appreciated. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have no problem with your links or sourcing, honestly (not my subject area), but I tread lightly around 32.218 because they have problems with civility and are overly strict about sourcing (I have problems with them often on Wisconsin articles and they just came off a two-week rangeblock for combative talk page editing, which is why I'm not tagging them in). Honestly I'd refute their WP: drops and make it clear the links are staying in, no matter what they say about BLOG (which I don't believe you are violating at all). Nate•(chatter) 02:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Fernand Léger, 1922, Still Life with Candlestick, oil on canvas, 116 x 80 cm, Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris.jpg[edit]
I understand your revision, that Guan Zilan wasn't a European in the first decade of the 20th century. However she is supposed to have been the one to introduce Fauvism into China via Japan in the late 1920s, after the movement was out of style in Europe.Jacqke (talk) 06:40, 5 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Jacqke, being non-European is irrelevant. The article is about a short-lived movement promulgated by a small group of artists at the outset of the 20th-century (between 1905–1908), principally, who exhibited at the 1905 Salon d'Automne (and the 1906 Salon des Indépendants). Coldcreation (talk) 08:19, 5 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, I understand that. The article mentioned style as well as movement, which was what attracted my attention. I guess another article will have to address the continuation of Fauvism as a painting style inspired by the movement. Thank you,Jacqke (talk) 14:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your recent editing history at Led Zeppelin shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doug Wellertalk 19:25, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bucharest Telephone Palace - a fine example of Art Deco architecture in Eastern Europe[edit]
I do not think that your reasoning that the Bucharest Telephone Palace is not a fine example of Art Deco in Europe is just. As it is a prime example of the style in the Southeastern and Eastern European landscape, having no true equivalent in the region in terms of height. Also besides the antennas on top it did not change its design over the years. Therefore, I think the pictured example should be allowed on the page for the sake of diversity, in order to show how this modernist style was used in architecture across all of Europe. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lupul carpatin (talk • contribs) 14:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: Much obliged. As there are not very many sources in Romanian. Communism tends to do that, in regards to historiography about the ante period (pre 1947.) :) --Lupul carpatin (talk) 20:14, 5 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Greetings User:Coldcreation. Thank you for finding a cite for that Renoir painting at the Impressionism page. Obviously that is why it was selected as the first Impressionist painting in the body of the article.
You’ve been around a long time, so just a tip, that I’m sure you’ll recognize from being on both sides of: when plausible content is added that requires a cite, avoid reverting it – which just tends to lead to hurt feelings and too often revert wars – just use the citation needed note. In this case I’d already gone looking for one before going back to the article to discover you had already added one yourself. Very good, and an uncommon and happy surprise.
I didn’t go to look before starting this whether you also added that citation at the page for that painting. I added the CN note there, but didn’t to the Impressionism article as I didn’t want to clutter up the caption. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wikiuser100: Funny thing is, in all the time I've been editing here, I don't recall ever having added a citation needed, tag. I've always just added a reference where one might be needed. The "masterpiece" claim for Moulin de la Galette was easily found at Google Books, even going back through decades of publications. In the time it takes to add a CN tag (dated), a reference can be found—my recommendation. Cheers. Coldcreation (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi User:Coldcreation, I am new to editing on Wikipedia and I noticed you reverted an addition I made to the Post-Impressionism Wikipedia page. You noted that I needed to cite a source. Can you explain to me how to do that? If I wanted to add a new name into the list of prominent Post-Impressionist artists, do I need to add a footnote next to it as a source? This does not parallel the existing names that are listed on the page (as they have no footnotes next to them). Thank you. Miketrentt (talk) 20:22, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Miketrentt: welcome to Wikipedia. To add a source see Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Citing sources. I have just added a source to that sentence in the Post-Impressionism article. You'll note that André Dunoyer de Segonzac is not mentioned in that source. That is because, while he may have painted initially in the Post-Impressionist style, he was not known for painting in that style, and was certainly not a leader of the movement. I would be interested to find out where you are getting your information from. Coldcreation (talk) 20:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Coldcreation. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Greetings Coldcreation regarding your revert of my edit on L.H.O.O.Q. I think you're well-aware that the many of the readymades were never placed "in an appropriate setting". I think Duchamp himself in his discussion with Cabanne was pretty clear about L.H.O.O.Q.: "I didn't show it anywhere". [1] So showing it in the context of an art gallery or some other "appropriate place" has nothing to do with it. Frankly, I don't think that Kuenzli says any such a thing either. Vexations (talk) 00:24, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Vexations: On page 47 of Kuenzli's Dada and Surrealist Film, after describing how various readymades are presented or displayed, the author writes: "This decontextualization of the object's functional place draws attention to the creation of its artistic meaning by the choice of the setting and positioning ascribed to the object." He goes on to explain the importance of naming the object (ascribing a title). So, at least three things were/are important: the choice of object, the title, and the context of how it was modified from its normal position and/or location (or choice of the setting). For example, by virtue of placing a urinal in an art exhibition, or art journal (such as LHOOQ, when Picabia published a version in 391, March 1920), or even just hanging on a wall (in a gallery or in his studio), the illusion of an artwork was/is created. Coldcreation (talk) 05:17, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've read Kuenzli, and "The readymade involves taking mundane, often utilitarian objects not generally considered to be art and transforming them, by adding to them, changing them, or (as in the case of his most famous work Fountain) simply renaming and reorienting them and placing them in an appropriate setting" is not a very accurate summary. L.H.O.O.Q. was created either in October or December of 1919 (Duchamp gave two different dates). Publication did not happen until March 1920, and that was Picabia's version. It took another 10 years for the original to be exhibited in La peinture au défi at Galerie Goemans in March 1930. For L.H.O.O.Q., there was no "placing". Vexations (talk) 12:33, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
True, it is not very accurate. Feel free to refine or change the text. Coldcreation (talk) 12:39, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note though, the "placing" of L.H.O.O.Q. by Picabia, in an art publication, is equivalent to placing a readymade on the wall of a gallery, or pedestal of a salon exhibition. Context... Coldcreation (talk) 19:07, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose that if Duchamp was never able to come up with a satisfactory definition of what a readymade is, we won't be able either: "The curious thing about the Readymade is that I've never been able to arrive at a definition or explanation that fully satisfies me." I'd be tempted to go with the one from the Dictionnaire abrégé du Surréalisme, ("an ordinary object elevated to the dignity of a work of art by the mere choice of an artist) were it not that it is so completely unworkable. Almost none of the works that Duchamp referred to as readymades actually meet that definition, as Obalk points out. I rather suspect that Adina Kamien-Kazhdan, in Remaking the Readymade: Duchamp, Man Ray, and the Conundrum of the Replica has something to say we might use. I'm going to see if I can find it in a library. Vexations (talk) 19:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good points. There are several interviews of Duchamp online that might be of interest to you. I checked out a couple yesterday, and did not extract much. Most are from the 1950s. It would have been interesting to see a 1917-1930 interview. Not sure if any exist. Coldcreation (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Coldcreation, you've done such a good job adding to and editing Fountain that maybe it's time to suggest it as a feature. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Randy Kryn: The subject certainly merits it, but the article still needs work. A nomination would get others involved, adding to the article quality. It's your call. Coldcreation (talk) 04:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Separated this section from an interesting discussion above. I defer to you on this, both because you've done so well in polishing and expanding the page, and I don't have any experience with feature writing or nominating here. Never visited the page as I can recall. If you haven't heard, some interesting news today about a well-preserved Leda and the Swan wall fresco being unearthed at Pompeii, quite a realistic piece done before 79 A.D. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:23, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've never nominated an article either. I suppose it's not so difficult. I'll check it out. But yea, that fresco is amazing. I caught a glimpse of it is the news. Coldcreation (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have reacquainted myself with the WP:MOS concerning dates. At the time it seemed like a reasonable request from the other editor, but I see now there are standard conventions. I will let that editor know and direct him to the appropriate page. A personal request... Would you consider archiving your talk page? I found it to be unwieldy to navigate due to its size. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 22:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem. About archiving the talk page; I will look into it further, but it looks complicated. Coldcreation (talk) 23:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not fair just to throw away selected images of an artist[edit]
Hello Coldcreation. I think, it is not fair just to throw away my selected images, like you did in the painting-Gallery of Seurat, without any sort of discussion. I selected carefully some of the early works of Seurat, because they show where the man comes from! He didn't discover Pointillism in the blink of his eye. He was growing to it and he was connected with many other artists around him. I think it is important in the selection of works of an artist to illustrate this, andf not only the highlights he or she made.
I hope next time you will discuss with me these kind of matters first, before throwing the added images away without one word?FotoDutch (talk) 16:24, 12 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And you did the same with Severini, again without any discussion. So the time I invested in selecting them was just for nothing? And this can happen any time?FotoDutch (talk) 16:34, 12 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@FotoDutch: If you read the edit summaries, you will see why the images were removed. In the case of Severini, the works were erroneously uploaded to Commons; they are not public domain, and therefore, their presence at Commons violates copyright law. In the Seurat article, at least two images are simply lesser works that need not be in the main article. Anyone can see them by clicking on the Commons link in External links. Coldcreation (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
About the Severini-pictures: sorry! I didn't see that in Commons. About the Seurat pictures, we differ in opinion. As I said, the earlier pictures were important to understand better Seurat's development as an artist. Maybe not so good; but they describe where he got started.FotoDutch (talk) 14:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have not redone your removal of the painting. Let me know if I may put it back on the page, and whether it would be better if I leave it in the 'Cubism in Asia' section rather than in the gallery.
Dereklauzy123 (talk) 08:41, 22 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dereklauzy123: I just revised the section. No need for a photo. The links to respective articles are sufficient, and images are there. Coldcreation (talk) 09:31, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
uploading picture of artist which were published for auctions[edit]
Hallo ColdCreation,
I started a Gallery and like to upload and use some pictures of Gabriële Münter (1877 – 1962). There is not much on Commons. But I found some pictures of her work via artnet, which where published there as being pictures of (past) auctions - in a very low resolution.
I read that it is allowed to upload pictures if: 'The work is known to be in the public domain for some other clear reason.' I think this is the case when it was published for auction where everybody is publicly able to make his offer for buying it. You agree? Then looking for auction-pictures of a certain artist is a good path to use when there is not much to fond on Commons. You agree with this?
Here is the example: http://www.artnet.com/artists/gabriele-m%C3%BCnter/kohlgruberstra%C3%9Fe-murnau-Tegag5SA7iRNTk47ZTCRvQ2
all the best,FotoDutch (talk) 10:11, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are mixing two rules and that is not necessary, I think... One exception says: 'The work is known to be in the public domain for some other clear reason. - So this is not connected with any year or date.
And the very general rule says: 'Works of this artist first published before 1923 can be uploaded to English Wikipedia'.
There is no need to mix two rules, I believe. But we can start a discussion..
Another thing.. ..there are different rules for uploading to Commons as to Wikipedia, thanks God!
Wishing you all the best for x-mass, hope it is a time of cheer. Ceoil (talk) 21:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ceoil: Thank you very much Ceoil. Appreciated. Likewise, I wish you all the best during this festive season, and 2019 of course!!! Coldcreation (talk) 13:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2019 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 12:48, 24 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Modernist: thanks, and I wish the same for you, for your holidays and new year, and for your loved ones!!! Best, Coldcreation (talk) 13:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To Coldcreation, best wishes to you and yours for a joyous holiday season and a happy & healthy 2019. Ewulp (talk) 01:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
..to be jolly! @Ewulp: Happy holiday and new years to you too, Thanks for A merry making party, reminds me of last night. Coldcreation (talk) 12:24, 25 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Complaint about your edits of Art Deco at the edit warring noticeboard[edit]
I see you reverted all I added to the article, including the footnotes. I realize I should have chosen "attributed to" instead of "produced by", but I am a bit amiss for the rest. Can you explain why everything needed to be reverted?
Replaceable fair use File:Portrait of Henri (Le Douanier) Rousseau, 1910, photograph Pablo Picasso.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Portrait of Henri (Le Douanier) Rousseau, 1910, photograph Pablo Picasso.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many thanks for the award link - resources on this guy are few and far between, so that was a real treat. My French is pretty basic, so let me know if there was anything contained of note/worth adding within those docs. Thanks again! Brawen (talk) 06:43, 8 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much @Brawen:. I'm checking right now to see if any more valuable information can be extracted from the Archives nationales. Aside from the artists address listed several times (96 Avenue des Ternes, Paris) I'm afraid there may not be very much. However, I will have a look at some related gouv.fr websites to see what is to be found. Coldcreation (talk) 07:44, 8 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On pages 13 and 14 the full name of his mother is given as Laure Elisabeth Antoinette Béchet (close enough to the name already in the wiki article). It also states she was 20 years old when she gave birth, placing her birth date at 1847. Coldcreation (talk) 07:54, 8 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've just added a few links. The last one (Gallica, BnF), especially, should be explored further. There is a vast amount of literature, and many images, pertaining to this artist. Coldcreation (talk) 08:37, 8 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: Amazing! Thanks again for your help. Please feel free to add anything you find - your work on Metzinger is absolutely first-rate, so I'd be thrilled for any assistance you could provide! I'm still trying to get the hang of this "talk" feature - so please bare with me! Regrading the Salon des Independants, I've not looked into them, but am definitely intrigued. I suspect Dethomas exhibited just about everywhere Toulouse-Lautrec did (at least after 1893) - so there's a good chance he was involved. My initial focus was actually finding pre-1900 exhibition records for Dethomas. I know they're out there. I don't actually have access to the Barc catalogues aside from the newspaper reviews, but I feel that there would be a wealth of info in those also. Regarding the BnF suggestion, I've ploughed through it many times over the years and have just about taken it as far as my limited French will allow. One very exciting piece of information you've shared was the location of a pastel "Yvonne" on the Archives Nationales link - it was exhibited in the US in 1915 along with a sister-work. I've been looking for it for years.Brawen (talk)
Thanks @Coldcreation:, yep I've come across those - really cool. I've been pretty selective with which images to upload so far. I have an entire album here you might find interesting: https://imgur.com/a/LTind . I plan on adding selected original sketches that were used in published works when time permits - probably 8 or so. There are literally hundreds of his woodcuts about, but I thought seeing the drawings they were taken from may be nice. I'm also yet to add another half-dozen prints and posters. I was thinking the early programmes would be a good choice. Regarding the high-res Gallica upload, nope not aware you could. Brawen (talk)
See here (in French). Basically, instead of clicking on Télécharger image en entier, click on "une partie de l'image en resolution superieure". There you select the portion of the screen. Sometimes you need to make two selections to obtain the image in full (I then splice them together in photoshop). Here is another way. This explanation is in French too.Coldcreation (talk) 08:07, 9 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ooh, that's very nice. Should come in handy, thanks. Brawen (talk) 08:28, 9 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, are you familiar with frame-make/dealer Pierre Cluzel? I had planned on starting a new wiki on him at some point, but my French just isn't up to it. He was a pretty important figure during the period - see if you'd be interested: http://frederic-destremau.weebly.com/pierre-cluzel.htmlBrawen (talk) 08:43, 9 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: A small favour to ask - could you help with a short translation? This letter was written by Dethomas regarding is view of Lautrec in 1898: "Les choses de lui que je vois me donnent comme toujours une envie folle de travailler. Les choses de ce garçon, qui, s'il n'a pas de talent, a certainement un peu de génie, sont toujours pour moi un coup de fouet. C'est comme si on me livrait la route avec invitation brusque on est abruti d'admiration. On est arrêté, décourage, après eux on a tiré l'échelle, on est en prison. " I'm afraid I'm missing a lot of nuance, particularly in the last section, so any help you can offer would be greatley appreciated. Brawen (talk) 06:39, 11 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Brawen: Not easy to translate. Literally translated it come out strange. Here's what I gather overall: "The things I see by him always give me an intense desire to work. The things of this boy—who, if he has no talent, certainly has a little genius—always hit me hard. It's as if I was suddenly delivered the path, and stupefied with admiration. We are blocked, discouraged, abruptly let down, we are in prison." Coldcreation (talk) 10:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: Thanks - it's a tough one. That last sentence is still a bit of a mystery to me. I still cant quite tell if he's entirely praising Lautrec or being critical of him. Both perhaps.
@Brawen: I think he was trying to say that Lautrec's work was so powerful that, even though inspiring, it froze him in his track, like a deer in headlights, blocked in front of his empty canvas, discouraged that never will he (or anyone else) rise to the same heights. Coldcreation (talk) 17:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Brawen: Is that translation really in Milhou 1991, p.64, or is it from Google Translate? First, the word [paintings] should be in brackets, not parentheses. Second, "crazy desire to work" is too literally translated; so too is "sting of a whip". Coldcreation (talk) 08:10, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation:Rechecking, looks like OCR/I missed a sentence. Probably makes much more sense now. I double checked it against the physical book - it should read: «Les choses de lui que je vois me donnent comme toujours une envie folle de travailler. Les choses de ce garçon, qui, s'il n'a pas de talent, a certainement un peu de génie, sont toujours pour moi un coup de fouet. C'est comme si on me livrait la route avec invitation brusque d’y courir. Les tableaux de maitre ne me donnent pas cela, on est abruti d'admiration. On est arrêté, décourage, après eux on a tiré l'échelle, on est en prison. » Also, I've amended the wiki to your current translation - let me know if you'd like it changed. Thanks for your time with this - I've a couple more letters I'd like help with if you could.Brawen (talk) 11:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed that omission changes the meaning of the final sentence. Here is the updated translation: "The things I see by him always give me an intense desire to work. The things of this boy, who, if he has no talent, certainly has a little genius, are always for me a whiplash [coup de fouet]. It's as if I was shown the way with a sudden invitation to advance. The master paintings do not give me that, we are stupefied with admiration. We are blocked, discouraged, after them we are let down, we are in prison." Coldcreation (talk) 11:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Coldcreation Absolutely brilliant, that sounds great. It's a nice little quote that really helps clarify their professional relationship, I think.
Another couple of letters that would really help close out the section on Lautrec, relate to his death from the perspective of Dethomas and Bulteau - translating the humour and sadness conveyed in these letters is far beyond my skill-set, but clearly not yours. If it's not too much to ask, could you take a look over them? Once again, very thankful for any help you can provide:
1) Quand Maxime Dethomas apprend la mort de son ami, il écrit à Madame Bulteau, Vendredi 13 septembre 1901 :
« Madame chérie, Le pauvre Lautrec est mort, il paraît qu'il n'a pas cessé de parler de moi dans son agonie. Comme c'est singulier ! Je ne croyais pas tenir une si grande place dans l'esprit et le cœur de ce pauvre être. Il a gardé sa connaissance très tard et affirmé que ce n'était pas rien de mourir, que c'était rudement dur. Il paraît aussi que se rendant compte de la grandeur de son nez par rapport à son visage réduit à rien, il aurait dit en le désignant : « Quand je serai mort il aura l'air d'un croûton planté dans un plat d'épinards. Vous le voyez, il est resté lui-même jusqu'au bout ! Encore un de parti ! Giraudat, Tinan, lui et les autres. Il me semble vraiment assister à une bataille et je suis (à) une aile où le plomb tape juste et dur. »
2)La réponse de Madame Bulteau, du 16 septembre, résume fort bien le ton des rapports entre les deux amis et la raison de l'attachement profond du petit homme pour son « Gros n’arbre ». « Je comprends et je ressens avec vous la détresse que vous cause la mort de Lautrec. On aime toujours les gens plus qu'on ne croyait, il ne faut point espérer quand on a des sensibilités telles que la vôtre, que personne de ceux qu'on a frôlés un peu souvent puisse disparaître sans arracher quelque chose du cœur. Qu'il vous aimât, comme il pouvait aimer et de son mieux, c'est ce dont j'ai toujours eu l'impression très nette dans les paroles que l'on apprenait qu'il avait dites de vous, on apercevait sa « considération » pour la qualité de votre esprit et, sans doute aussi, cette douceur d'âme qui est en vous et qui savait lui dissimuler la pitié. »
To give the first letter some important context, on June 15, 1901, Lautrec left Paris for the final time. He was a accompanied by a few friends to the Gare d'Orsay (one appears to have been Dethomas, judging by his letter). Before boarding the train Lautrec was quoted as saying, 'We can kiss, for you won't be seeing me again'- then as an afterthought when seeing his friends sad expressions, he continued: 'When I am dead, I'll have a nose like Cyrano!'- a reference to Cyrano de Bergerac, a character Lautrec felt great affinity for. Anyway, I only mention this as no other academic text (obscure as it is) mentions Dethomas' presence at the station that day, so this letter may or may not stand as proof of that, depending on an accurate translation. Regarding Bulteau's letter, the third-person perspective of their relationship is a great bookend, I feel.Brawen (talk) 13:25, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
An additional note regarding the first letter I should have mentioned: the reference "not enough to die, that it was hard" may relate to one of Lautrec's final words: "Dying's damned hard". Also "Giraudat and Tinan" were both dear friends of Dethomas that died in the 1890's. Of note also - Bulteau really did not care for Lautrec, but I sense she valued Dethomas enough to respect their friendship. Brawen (talk) 14:01, 13 June 2019 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Brawen (talk • contribs) 13:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have been systematically adding links to the Art UK pages for artists. This is a charity that has systematically catalogued and imaged every oil painting in public ownership in the UK -- the first time this has ever been done -- and now makes the results available on its website.
I believe this is overwhelmingly a useful link to give readers on our articles.
We currently have 22,547 artists on Wikidata matched to Art UK pages, of whom 7701 currently have Wikipedia articles. (Wikipedia:GLAM/Your_paintings#Stats)
We previously had about 1800 transclusions of the {{Art UK bio}} template, added pretty haphazardly and inconsistently. I believe it should be rolled out systematically -- something I have meant to do for a long time -- so in the last day or so I have started adding it in an organised way, starting with the painters with the largest numbers of works in UK collections and going down the list. It now has 2093 transclusions, and is present on all painters with more than 34 works in UK collections, that being where I have got to.
I am quite happy to pause, if there's eg an appropriate WikiProject that it would be useful to take this for consultation. But I do think these links are useful, and should be uncontroversial. Jheald (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To Coldcreation, best wishes to you and your family for a joyous Holiday Season and a happy and healthy New Year. Ewulp (talk) 04:39, 22 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2020 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 02:13, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Coldcreation, I just started off the New Year on Wikipedia by spending a while looking at all the lovely images in your gallery. Thanks so much! Happy New Year Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 16:58, 1 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. I noticed your participation on the Man Ray page. I have just submitted a new page on a woman who was a friend and very important collector of his work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rosalind_Gersten_Jacobs She passed away last week and I was hoping to get this page live asap. Unfortunately, it looks like a four-month wait. The response to my inquiry about expediting the review process on one of the help sites was that I just had to wait until an editor "happened to pick it up." Not very encouraging, to say the least. So I'm reaching out to see if you might be interested and willing to just "happen to pick it up." I thank you for consideration of this request. Happy New Year.Gaw54 (talk) 06:49, 2 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Coldcreation. Your feedback is greatly appreciated! I've made a number of edits, eliminating things I'm unable to document and adding more frequent references. I hope these changes address your concerns and will allow the page to move forward in the review process. Happy New Year!Gaw54 (talk) 23:18, 2 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I still see paragraphs with no references at the end. Coldcreation (talk) 10:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 12[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Czech Cubism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antonín Procházka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, do you have a specific reason for reverting my edit over at Gravitational time dilation ? The r in question does refer to the 'slow-ticking' observer, and if you're someone who just wants to do a quick calculation, that section is clarified by making it explicit (it's explicit in all other occurence of 'observer' in the section). [diff page is here.] Ketarax (talk) 16:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ketarax: There is no such thing as a "slow-ticking observer". What was your former Username here at Wikipedia? Coldcreation (talk) 18:17, 15 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: There's a "slow-ticking observer" in the clarification for t0 in that same section. There's a "fast-ticking observer" spelled out for tf. This "fast-ticking observer" is at r=inf. The r we're dealing with is for the "slow-ticking observer", ie. the one within the gravitational field; also, this r cannot < rs. If you want to talk about rigorous presentation of general relativity, fine, but given the purpose and present state of that page, my clarification is not making it any worse. I want you to explain to me why in your opinion it would be wrong to call the observer within the strong gravitational field "slow-ticking" in this case. Ketarax (talk) 09:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: I have never had any other accounts here at Wikipedia. I've only made a handful of minor edits (like the present one). I started my userpage yesterday, because I wanted to make it absolutely sure you can contact me; figured out right after that it was not needed. If you would, I'd like to also hear what about my transactions has you feeling I'm playing some username-games? Ketarax (talk) 09:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks very much for support on this topic. Hard to imagine how anyone could believe that Art Nouveau would flourish in the 1930s under the fascists, when you see the kind of buildings they built. Best regards SiefkinDR (talk) 11:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Coldcreation,
What's the reason for replacing the Mare image in the section on the Society of Decorative Artists with the fashion illustration by Barbier? What's his connection with the Society? Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SiefkinDR:, good question. I searched Commons for quite a while looking for an appropriate image. The Mare work was from 1920, though I like it very much. I was trying to find an image that corresponds more to the section subject and timeline (1901–1913). If you feel the Mare image (or other) fits in there better, please feel free to remove the Barbier image. Coldcreation (talk) 17:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've put together two images of works major SAD members from that period, and left in the Barbier, since though I don't think he was SAD member, it fits the style. I appreciate all your good work on the article. SiefkinDR (talk) 19:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for reviewing the changes I made to this page. I propose to continue to work through the article adding sourced material that is relevant to Dali's work and career and deleting dubious and unsourced/poorly sourced material. If you could continue to review my changes, that would be great. As it is likely that we two will be the most active on this page for the next few weeks, is this the best forum to discuss changes? Or would you prefer to chat on the Dali talk page? PS: I am not very technically proficient as a wiki contributor yet so I might need your help on technical issues. Thanks. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:12, 21 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Aemilius Adolphin: probably best to discuss issues at Talk:Salvador Dalí. One point, rather than remove unsourced material (unless obviously dubious), perhaps you can add a citation needed tag, or better yet, add reliable sources. Thanks for your contributions. Coldcreation (talk) 05:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would like to use the file in a trivia game app. However, I would like to ask you for some clarification on copyright, if I may. Did you create the file from Walt Kuhn's scrapbook? If so, why is the "source" listed as the Kunstmuseum in The Hague? I understand they own the actual painting, but I would think that's a separate issue from owning copyright to an image of the painting. Thank you.
Wfgiuliano (talk) 19:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The image of this painting is public domain in the United States only, since it was first published prior to 1 January 1925. If the trivia game app is based in the US you should have no problem. Coldcreation (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I noted that you have patrolled the Art Deco page, and from some of your comments, seemed to be knowledgeable about the form. I need an opinion about a group of what I understand to be Art Deco portraits; before I upload them into the Commons, I want to be sure my understanding is correct. The works are from Edward Mason Eggleston; his works have fallen into public domain, as none had the copyrights renewed. He did many works that could be called pinups, and some that have been pointed out as Art Deco. I think that most could fall under this category, but am not sure. Wikimedia Commons has very little in the way of Art Deco paintings (that I have found), especially of people. On Eggleston's page, the references in the lists have links to paintings. When you have time, could you browse a few and give me an opinion as to genre? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Jacqke (talk) 17:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jacqke: Good question. He certainly represented fashionable women in a few paintings that could be considered to be wearing Art Deco-like attire, and some of the poses resemble sculptures from the Art Deco period. But I have found no references that refer to the artists work as Art Deco. You would have to find reliable sources that mention such an affiliation. Coldcreation (talk) 07:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will start that search. My guess is that someone on the internet applied the lable Art Deco to him over an advertisement illustration, such as "Valentine Girl". Nearly all the bios online originate in a single source, I think, the paragraphs being nearly identical. I'll try to track down better sources. Thank you, Jacqke (talk) 10:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bus stop: Thanks for the heads up. I just made the Purism text more precise. Not sure yet that it is precise enough though. While born from a reaction against Cubism, it is still considered a form of Cubism. I need to find a source for that. Coldcreation (talk) 06:44, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What occurred to me was that Purism was a form of Cubism, as you had written at the Purism article. I was also concerned with what I felt was misplaced emphasis on lofty concerns such as "rationality" instead of more concrete observations such as "elementary forms devoid of detail", as you had written at the Purism article. Bus stop (talk) 14:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Coldcreation, thanks for this creation, I am going to translate into french. I might need little help about some sources. Yours, --Marc-AntoineV (talk) 05:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Marc-AntoineV: Sure, good idea. Let me know if you need any help. Though my forte is French → English, I could perhaps be of some assistance for English → French. Coldcreation (talk) 06:27, 12 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Long time no talk, hope you are, eh, surviving. Can you keep a look at the above page; it looks like a "foundation" are using wiki to establish a very shaky attribution. Ceoil (talk) 22:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Greetings! You greatly improved this article in 2012. I can't believe no one has added to it in 8 years. In particular, it seems to me that any article on orphism and Apollinaire must refer to Jean Cocteau, a great friend of Apollinaire, who wrote a great deal on the myth of Orpheus and of course made several extraordinary films based on it.
Best wishes in the time of Covid (noting that Apollinaire himself was taken from this world by another terrible pandemic). Melba1 (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I am not aware of any rule barring repetition of this information in the infobox and the lede of an article on a painting (we certainly repeat things like birth and death dates in infoboxes and ledes all the time), but in this case I think it is particularly appropriate to mention in the lede, since one of the key arguments about the origin of the painting is that it is in fact on canvas, which was not Leonardo's preferred medium. I would prefer to include that right up front in the lede, on that basis. Cheers! BD2412T 21:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Flagrant hysterical curious: Without a caption, that first work of art is meaningless. In addition, the file will not be in the public domain in its home country until January 1, 2029. It has thus been nominated for deletion. For the Street Light (painting), you need to produce a Non-free use rationale on the file page before posting. Please include captions with artwork images, especially when there is an article about the painting. Coldcreation (talk) 17:00, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Coldcreation: I apologize for overlinking the Max Beckmann article! I'm a rather new editor, it's my 5th day only. I get over-zealous sometimes, and I'm still learning the ropes. Hopefully the recent edits I made are more sensible. Best regards. TrevorZa (talk) 01:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Coldcreation, as a more experienced art contributor than I, I was wondering if you could take a look at Portrait of a Musician. I plan to hopefully slowly work through most, if not all of Leonardo's paintings (as now I finally have enough high quality sources to do them justice!) but I am concerned about the current layout of Portrait of a Musician. I want to nominate it for FA soon, where if passed it could hopefully serve as a template for the future Leonardo paintings I work on... what I mean by this is more often than not his works have extreme debate over dating, subject, material, history and attribution, which I'm sure you've come across, so having an article to come back to on how it can be effectively laid out would undoubtedly be crucial. Layout aside, any comments/edits at all would be helpful. Best - Aza24 (talk) 05:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Aza24: Note that the Leonardo da Vinci article is a former featured article. Please check the nomination archive link on the Talk page. Also, Leonardo da Vinci is listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. I'm sure the article can still be improved, but not sure it needs a total overhaul. With respect to Portrait of a Musician I'll look at it when I have more time to do so. Coldcreation (talk) 05:02, 24 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for being willing to do so when you have time! On Leonardo's article: To be honest, it really does need an overhaul. Maybe not completely in terms of the biography section, but if it is to reach FA standard to the level of an article like van Gogh (which is my hope) I will have to change a lot. I have checked the talk page archive and the article's history, its an FA from before 2005 and a 2006 GA and that seems to speak for itself as it is missing some crucial academic literature and is over reliant on many outdated sources. Leonardo scholarship has changed immensely since the publication books it uses like: Chiesa 1976 – who is not even a notable art historian, Bortolon 1976 – which doesn't even use page numbers and neither does Arasse 1998 even though both have more than 20 references. Almost every source used in the painting section is from before the 1980s, including much Vasari, certainly not appropriate; issues with the biography like that Leonardo's life from 1478–1512 uses the same amount of space as his life from 1512–1519 (not to mention how short the bio as a whole is!) Aza24 (talk) 05:52, 24 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Congratulations on an interesting article about an artist that I knew little about. Well done sir (or madam). I hope you don't mind but I have created a notes section for reference to Biva's date of death. If you are interested you are welcome to comment on my latest two articles on the artist Eugène Chigot and Edward Stott. They were working at the same time as Biva and both trained in Paris. Stott's death year is also ubiquitously wrong on the internet. I've visited his grave so I know I am right. best Dorkinglad (talk) 15:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Scene from Degenerate Art auction, 1938, works by Picasso, Head of a Woman, Two Harlequins.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Scene from Degenerate Art auction, 1938, works by Picasso, Head of a Woman, Two Harlequins.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Constant Detré until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 31 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To Coldcreation, best wishes to you and yours for a holiday season filled with light and a happy & healthy 2021. Ewulp (talk) 22:31, 23 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2021 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 13:22, 25 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seasons greetings. Hope you and yours are safe and well during this rather bleak period, though I think we will get through it. Best Ceoil (talk) 02:07, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And the best of times to you. Thanks for the nice holiday wishes, I've cooked the finest goose and made do with the steepest pint. May the happiest spirit of 2021 ring in the New Year for you and yours. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, yesterday I accepted the article Maddox Gallery submitted via AFC. As it was deleted once back in 2018, I had to scrutunise it well. The present sources have been published after the first AFD and are enough to pass NCORP according to my review. But the article is too short and needs expansion. A user like you who is specialised in art related articles shall be able to expand it. Thanks--Poppifiedtalk 09:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Coldcreation. You recently reverted my edits to Simultaneity, which is a disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages use a particular style, described at MOS:DAB. This includes things like not ending a line with a full stop, and only including one navigable link per bullet item. In addition, the version you restored links to itself. That results in the word simultaneity appearing in bold face, and no link to any article.
You also restored a link to that page on several other articles. Links to disambiguation pages are almost always a mistake, as disambiguation pages are not articles. If you do not like the idea of having an article on the concept of simultaneity in cubism, perhaps those links could go to Cubism, where the concept is mentioned, or to the dictionary definition at wikt:simultaneity. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 23:42, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have removed the links pending the publishing of an article of the topic. I will write one shortly, at which time the link will be reinstated. Thanks for your concern, and for highlighting the notion that such an article is needed. Coldcreation (talk) 06:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I'm David Gerard. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Please do not deliberately edit-war deprecated sources into articles on Wikipedia, particularly past the edit notice you would have had to click past.David Gerard (talk) 09:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To Coldcreation, best wishes to you and yours for a holiday season to remember and a happy & healthy 2022. Ewulp (talk) 01:50, 24 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is safe, festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2022 will be safe, healthy, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 18:01, 24 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this holiday season is safe, festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2023 will be safe, healthy, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 19:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Moïse Kisling, photograph.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to File:Joseph Csaky, La Danseuse, The Dancer, 1940-1959, Szeged, Kálvin tér, Anna-Kút Public Square d.jpg, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 01:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jean Metzinger.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically User:Coldcreation, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 14:50, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:36, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
He was involved with specifically the image before. I just put that into the article. Hafspajen (talk) 14:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
,_partially_glazed_stoneware,_75_x_19_x_27_cm,_Musée_d%27Orsay,_Paris.jpg)
_by_Matisse.jpg)
; see Talk:Paris for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Geojournal -- Geojournal (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Template:Robert Antoine Pinchon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
,_oil_on_canvas,_116_x_88.8_cm.jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_on_canvas,_116_x_88.8_cm.jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_on_canvas,_66_x_81_cm,_Musée_d%27Art_Moderne_de_la_Ville_de_Paris...jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_on_canvas,_165_x_111_cm,_exhibited_Salon_d%27Automne,_Paris,_1913-14,_no._770,_Manes_Moderni_Umeni,_Vystava,_Prague,_1914,_no._44.jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_on_canvas,_72.5_x_100_cm,_Rijksmuseum_Kröller-Müller,_Otterlo,_Netherlands.jpg){kind=link}
,_1912,_oil_on_canvas._85_x_115_cm._Private_collection.jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_on_canvas,_38.5_x_46.0_cm,_Art_Gallery_of_Ontario,_Toronto,_Canada.jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_on_canvas,_143.5_x_101.5_cm,_Musée_des_Beaux-Arts_de_Lyon.jpg){kind=link}
,_Albright-Knox_Art_Gallery.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Done Coldcreation (talk) 18:18, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
;_Pablo_Picasso,_Figure_dans_un_Fauteuil,_Catalogue_Collection_Uhde,_Hôtel_Drouot,_30_May_1921.jpg){kind=link}
_Rousseau,_1910,_photograph_Pablo_Picasso.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Rousseau,_1910,_photograph_Pablo_Picasso.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg)
Moved to Talk:Gravitational time dilation
.jpg)
.jpg)
