Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cerejota (talk | contribs) at 22:25, 8 February 2009 (Added {{talkback}} template to user talk page. using Friendly). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

2006	2007	2008
Archive 1, Jan - May 2006	Archive 4, Jan - Feb 2007	Archive 9, Jan - Jun 2008
Archive 2, Jun - Aug 2006	Archive 5, Mar 2007	Archive 10, Jul - Dec 2008
Archive 3, Sep - Dec 2006	Archive 6, Apr - Jun 2007	Archive 11, Jan - 2009
	Archive 7, Jul - Sep 2007
	Archive 8, Oct - Dec 2007	How to archive

To find an administrator, see list of administrators. To report a problem, see administrators incidents noticeboard, administrator's noticeboard and vandalism intervention. If you post about an new issue, which I'm not already involved in, you may not get a quick response.

Les Demoiselles

A well meaning new user, Olpl has uploaded a nearly 3 mb version of Picasso's Les Demoiselles. I don't want to scare him off, and additionally I have issues with the reasoning over the previous debate that classified the 1907 painting as Fair Use- these have been noted at File talk:Chicks-from-avignon.jpg. I would much appreciate it if you could weigh in on this issue. Thanks, and happy New Year, Lithoderm 21:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

RFC at WP:NOR-notice

A concern was raised that the clause, "a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge" conflicts with WP:NPOV by placing a higher duty of care with primary sourced claims than secondary or tertiary sourced claims. An RFC has been initiated to stimulate wider input on the issue. Professor marginalia (talk) 19:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Royal Institute of Oil Painters

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Royal Institute of Oil Painters, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://theroi.org.uk/historyroi.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), versions 1.3 or later then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Royal Institute of Oil Painters and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Royal Institute of Oil Painters with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Royal Institute of Oil Painters.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Misplaced Pages article layout. For more information on Misplaced Pages's policies, see Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Royal Institute of Oil Painters saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages. Happy editing! Ma_chups 17:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The ROI have used the wiki text, not the other way round. Ty 19:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Well so they have, and it now says so on their page. Thanks for clarifying, and sorry for the accusation. Ma_chups 16:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Scientist

Please check out this discussion here: Template_talk:Infobox_Scientist#Religion_field. Bletchley (talk) 11:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Religion and Science Deletion Issue

Check out this deletion discussion here: Bletchley (talk) 11:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Raft

Hi Ty, re: The painting is constructed upon two pyramidal structures, do you think you could put together a version of the painting that would show the outline of the two triangles that form the work? Either way, I wanted to thank you anyway for all your contributions to the article, its been a though one to put together and your help has been most useful. Best. Ceoil (talk) 21:13, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I moved version 6 onto the article. Thank you. Ceoil (talk) 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

NUMB3RS

Thanks for the note. Yes, as you can tell, you made a big impact on me when I was new. And in a time when so many expect a candidate to be "the very model of a modern Wikipedian," I feel they are a refreshing breath of common sense. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 00:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Template:Vincent van Gogh

Family and friends If there was more than one entry for "Family" then you would have a stronger argument. Of course, there is nothing inherently contradictory about being a family member as well as a friend to someone - which Theo was to Vincent. So, since there are not presently enough family members to justify an entirely different category, it seems logical to me to combine them. If you feel the need to discuss this further, please post on my talk. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Misleading? I disagree, especially with the idea that it is "misleading" to list his brother as one of his friends (especially since they share the same last name and anyone can simply read their articles to understand their relationship.) And his brother was his friend, so I can't imagine how anyone could be mislead to anything other than a correct idea. Anyway, if you want to post on talk there or at Talk:Vincent van Gogh, go for it. Or edit the template. The ball's in your court. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Thanx for the note on my Dutch talk page. I will keep in touch. I bumped into another wiki-en admin in the past doing another cross wiki vandalism case also on wiki-en and got an official "warning" here <sigh> from a guy called Dirk Beetsta (ano was blocked indef in the end by another admin on wiki-en happily) so have become rather shy here. Kind regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 18:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Update on the affair added here. MoiraMoira (talk) 18:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Socks

This person at - User talk:72.69.113.237 acts, talks and sounds just like BetaCommand...hmm, can't be though...because BC is indefinitely blocked.....hmmm I wonder. What do you think Ty? Modernist (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking exactly the same thing. Ty 19:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the rest of the community should know what he's doing at Grant Wood...Modernist (talk) 19:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll post to WP:AN/I. Ty 19:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

That makes good sense! Modernist (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Questions, aesthetic and practical

Hi, Ty. Would you have a look at the questions I've posed down by the old swimming hole ? Your thoughts, and possibly technical expertise, would be welcome. Cheers, JNW (talk) 03:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply. Too many good responses! Raul has just joined the discussion and mentioned his ability to photoshop as well. More soon. JNW (talk) 03:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Your willingness to help is much appreciated, as always. JNW (talk) 04:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Grant Wood

Thanks for your input on the talk page there. It is useful for the arts editors to have input on how this issue is being seen by others. I would certainly appreciate your drawing attention on the talk page of WP:WPVA if you come across any visual arts articles with FU problems, so that these can be resolved collegiately. Obviously time is needed to work through such things. Ty 15:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Certainly, I'll bear that in mind. I have seen that the visual arts WikiProject is one willing to take non-free content concerns seriously, so any issues in future I will certainly raise on the project talk page. Thanks J Milburn (talk) 21:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Ernest Hemingway and modernism

I'd encourage you to have another look at the Hemingway article. It does clearly discuss his being exposed to the "Parisian Modern Movement." As far as your request for sources, a Google search of "ernest hemingway" +modernism yields 1.49 million hits, many of which are widely respected scholarly sources. TheMindsEye (talk) 19:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

All the article on him says is that Stein "introduced him to the "Parisian Modern Movement"", but not that he is considered an exponent of it. I'm not saying he is or isn't; I don't know. The article on Modernism says, "This wave of the modern movement broke with the past in the first decade of the twentieth century, and tried to redefine various artforms in a radical manner. Leading lights within the literary wing of this movement (or, rather, these movements) include:" If he is a "leading light" in trying to "redefine art forms in a radical manner", then this should be in the article on him, or, as there is no reference for it there, the Modernism list needs one to validate his inclusion per WP:V. We don't refer readers to google... As you say there are numerous sound sources, it shouldn't be a problem. Ty 20:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't suggest that we refer users to Google, only that the preponderance of easily available documents suggests that your double revert might have been a little hasty. For further doc, you might also have a look at Modernist literature and List of English-language first and second generation modernist writers. My question to you is why you would twice revert an edit on a subject that admit that you don't know about? You might consider accepting good faith on the part of other editors, or double-checking on outside sources before quickly reverting edits. TheMindsEye (talk) 20:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I only reverted once. The first revert was by Freshacconci, who cast doubt on the validity of the inclusion. I checked the article on Hemingway, which is quite extensive, but his apparent role as a leading light of modernism isn't mentioned. Content isn't validated by assuming good faith, but by referencing it, and any content that isn't properly referenced can be removed. It's up to the editor who wants to keep the material to provide the reference. I don't know why you're posting here again, instead of just inserting the citation. That is the way that content gets improved. Ty 20:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

That's a poor citation. Ty 23:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Another notability question

Is Leonid Afremov notable? Bus stop (talk) 15:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Art for charity

I enjoyed the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Art_for_charity. I'm an art fan, too. Like, you know the one with the dogs playing poker? I LOVE that one. No, seriously-- I like Dutch realism, some varieties of modernism, and Hans Hofmann. I guess I like work that either blows me away with its representational accuracy (esp. old work where there were no photos) or with a kind of pure exploration of basic elements like color, line, etc. For some reason, Kandinsky does little for me.  J L G 4 1 0 4  15:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

"I can't say the subject of that particularly grabs me, but whatever." You mean you don't go in for poker-playing dogs? My heavens! Next thing you know, people will start thumbing their noses at black velvet Elvises! Anyway, thanks for the response and invitation.  J L G 4 1 0 4  00:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Robert Brackman

I could use a hand here...thanks...Modernist (talk) 23:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again Ty, that guy has some serious problems beyond spelling, and AN/I might be in the near future..Modernist (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Blindsided

He deleted the image..., I wasn't even aware of the issue till now...Modernist (talk) 03:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

The Raft

Has passed FA...thanks to all your work..Well Done.Modernist (talk) 00:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

thank you

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in, and I wanted to let you know I appreciated all of the comments, advice, criticism, and seriously took it all to heart this past week. I'll do my absolute best to not let any of you down with the incredible trust given me today. rootology (C)(T) 08:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Cerejota (talk) 04:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Mauro Saviola

Hi, could you please look at Talk:Mauro Saviola, I see that a date for his death has been added, but can find no evidence. As Wiki has been vandalised in the past, this is important.--Artypants (talk) 11:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting it, I wanted to know the correct course of action, and needed a second opinion, and better still an administrator's.--Artypants (talk) 12:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Altered comments

Just in case of confusion re Don't alter another editors comments, that wasn't me. The strikeout and unsigned commentary came in here . I've indented it properly and added attribution. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 14:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thx. I've just pointed him/her to WP:TALK#Editing comments. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Problems

Hi Ty, something is wrong with my account. When I try to revert vandal edits, like the most recent one on Sistine Chapel ceiling, I get this message: "There seems to be a problem with your login session;this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Please hit "back" and reload the page you came from, then try again." I get a similar message when I try to undo the edit. Wiki pages take forever to load, but my connection speed is still 10136 kb. Is something wrong with the server? Lithoderm 17:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it fixed itself after I logged out and logged in again. Sorry to bother you. Lithoderm 17:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Cerejota (talk) 22:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)