Jump to content

Talk:Art Institute of Chicago: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 47: Line 47:
'''seen''' to increase readers understanding of the topic. Don't do it again. The image is specifically mentioned in the text about the art collection, the image is of an important part of the art collection and in case you don't know - this is an article about an art museum. Visual art needs to be seen - read [[WP:NFCC]] more carefully..[[User:Modernist|Modernist]] ([[User talk:Modernist|talk]]) 22:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
'''seen''' to increase readers understanding of the topic. Don't do it again. The image is specifically mentioned in the text about the art collection, the image is of an important part of the art collection and in case you don't know - this is an article about an art museum. Visual art needs to be seen - read [[WP:NFCC]] more carefully..[[User:Modernist|Modernist]] ([[User talk:Modernist|talk]]) 22:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
:This is absolute nonsense; we've been through similar arguments at length regarding other articles. You don't need to see a nonfree image of the painting to understand that it's in the museum's collection; text alone is sufficient to convey the point. NFCC8 violation. [[User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|Hullaballoo Wolfowitz]] ([[User talk:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|talk]]) 17:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
:This is absolute nonsense; we've been through similar arguments at length regarding other articles. You don't need to see a nonfree image of the painting to understand that it's in the museum's collection; text alone is sufficient to convey the point. NFCC8 violation. [[User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|Hullaballoo Wolfowitz]] ([[User talk:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|talk]]) 17:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
*The only nonsense is your misreading of NFCC8; you do not own some right from on high to delete valid and important visual art...[[User:Modernist|Modernist]] ([[User talk:Modernist|talk]]) 21:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
::Disagree -- an image of, in the words of the article, the "famous" painting -- substantially increases reader's understanding of this museum collection and reader's understanding would be harmed without it. The point isn't that it's any painting; the point is that it is this painting that looks like this, and famously conveys this mood, moment, time, etc. [[User:Alanscottwalker|Alanscottwalker]] ([[User talk:Alanscottwalker|talk]]) 17:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
::Disagree -- an image of, in the words of the article, the "famous" painting -- substantially increases reader's understanding of this museum collection and reader's understanding would be harmed without it. The point isn't that it's any painting; the point is that it is this painting that looks like this, and famously conveys this mood, moment, time, etc. [[User:Alanscottwalker|Alanscottwalker]] ([[User talk:Alanscottwalker|talk]]) 17:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
:::It seems to me that the image [[Nighthawks]] clearly has [[WP:NFCC#8|contextual significance]] in the article [[Art Institute of Chicago]]. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 18:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
:::It seems to me that the image [[Nighthawks]] clearly has [[WP:NFCC#8|contextual significance]] in the article [[Art Institute of Chicago]]. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 18:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
::::Visual art needs to be seen, don't revert again...[[User:Modernist|Modernist]] ([[User talk:Modernist|talk]]) 21:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
::::Visual art needs to be seen, don't revert again...[[User:Modernist|Modernist]] ([[User talk:Modernist|talk]]) 21:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
*The only nonsense is your misreading of NFCC8; you do not own some right from on high to delete valid and important visual art...[[User:Modernist|Modernist]] ([[User talk:Modernist|talk]]) 21:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:14, 28 April 2013

Lunch at the Restaurant Fournaise

THis painting was listed as being housed here but on it's page it is listed as being in washington DC. I don't think it's at the AIC. I have removed it but someone should double check me on this. Infact the list of housed paintings should be checked by someone in the know. Dannygutters 19:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This iconic painting(also called The Rower's Lunch) is part of the permanent collection of the Museum of the Art Institute of Chicago. It will travel to the Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, in the summer of 2008. Lunch at the Restaurant Fournaise (The Rower's Lunch) should not be confused with Luncheon of the Boating Party. (Rodney Hutton, rjhuttondfw@sbcglobla.net) March 19, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.64.149.105 (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would Like to See More History

Although a good introduction to the AIC today, this article ignores virtually all of the institution's history, including its former close ties to the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (which pre-dates it) and interesting curatorial controversies of the past. It needs more information to be really encyclopedic. Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 15:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Museum's Collection

I think a more full list of the museum's notable collection is needed, possibly in bullet point form. For example, major pieces like de Kooning's Excavation and Bacon's Figure with Meat are completely missing from the page. 71.201.132.221 (talk) 00:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'll try to draft a list of "important" works in the collection, especially works which already have Wikipedia pages. This has the potential to be very contentious, so I'll post here first and seek comments. Everyone please contribute since I have my own biases towards the types of art I like and have knowledge about; other opinions are needed to help round out the list. Mosfet007 (talk) 02:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major Overhaul

I'm beginning a major overhaul of this page. Some of the information is out of date or incomplete and there are major bits of information missing. The organization can use some work, too. This will be a multi-step process, but I'll work as quickly as I can so the page doesn't sit in limbo for too much longer. If anyone has anything you'd like to see added/subtracted/expanded/fixed and don't know how to do it, let me know here and I'll see what I can do. I'm a Chicago resident and a member of the Art Institute, so *hopefully* I can track down some of the answers.Mosfet007 (talk) 06:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the article start on FN 2? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.250.85.65 (talk) 11:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ferris Bueller at the Art Institute

This is a very moving tribute to the Institute by Hughes. The scene from the film shows many of the Institute's greatest works. Perhaps it may be of use in the article. It's a great scene anyway. --TS 02:28, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:JuanGris.Portrait of Picasso.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:JuanGris.Portrait of Picasso.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting valid and important images

Your interpretation of NFCC#8, no valid article-specific NFCC rationale - is dead wrong and IMO verges on vandalism. The policy states Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This painting precisely needs to be seen to increase readers understanding of the topic. Don't do it again. The image is specifically mentioned in the text about the art collection, the image is of an important part of the art collection and in case you don't know - this is an article about an art museum. Visual art needs to be seen - read WP:NFCC more carefully..Modernist (talk) 22:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolute nonsense; we've been through similar arguments at length regarding other articles. You don't need to see a nonfree image of the painting to understand that it's in the museum's collection; text alone is sufficient to convey the point. NFCC8 violation. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree -- an image of, in the words of the article, the "famous" painting -- substantially increases reader's understanding of this museum collection and reader's understanding would be harmed without it. The point isn't that it's any painting; the point is that it is this painting that looks like this, and famously conveys this mood, moment, time, etc. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that the image Nighthawks clearly has contextual significance in the article Art Institute of Chicago. Bus stop (talk) 18:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Visual art needs to be seen, don't revert again...Modernist (talk) 21:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]