Talk:List of artworks
|
|
| Contents |
Inclusion of photography
I'm unsure about User:Seth Ilys adding the category "photography" here. I certainly acknowlede it's an art form. However IMO it's a different type of artform (as are movies, music etc) than the hand made art objects listed here. Perhaps there should be a page along the lines of "Famous photographs" or "Great photographs"? Thoughts? -- Infrogmation 20:04, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, I myself was a little unsure of that; many famous photographs are "accidental" art and not intentional art... so I'll soon add a couple more articles on some really famous photos and move those links over to a page along the lines "List of notable photographs" (unless someone else has a better title for the page). -- Seth Ilys 21:57, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Graphical search
It would be very useful to have a second version of this page with thumbnails of each work of art. Frequently people will know what the work looks like, but can't remember what the name is. • Benc • 06:34, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- That might be a good idea, though for many modern artworks that may not be in public domain we don't have images onsite. -- Infrogmation 19:26, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Italicizing
I noticed that none of the works of art in the "Others" section are italicized. Is this intentional, and if so, what is the rationale? • Benc • 06:37, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Self-reference
I'm a little confused by the last item in this change from the edit history:
- This is a list of individual works of visual art (painting, sculpture, etc) which have articles about them in Wikipedia.
- Benc: removed "wikipedia" from lead; see Wikipedia:Avoid self-references
- This is a list of individual notable works of visual art (painting, sculpture, etc.)
- Infrogmation: Do not make a radical change on what this is a list of while editing out self reference
- This is a list of articles about notable individual works of visual art (painting, sculpture, etc.)
I fail to see how I made a "radical change". Yes, this is a technically a "list of articles about artworks". But unless one is being pedantic, I think it's perfectly acceptable to call it a "list of artworks". After all, that's the page title. Also, even the word "article" in this context is a minor violation of the "avoid self-references" guideline.
Of course this is a minor point, and I only mention it at all because the edit history claimed I made a "radical change". I'm simply curious to know why. As Infrogmation is a major contributor to this page, and I'm most likely just passing through, I'll defer to your judgement. But I just wanted to let you know why I made the change in the first place. • Benc • 19:01, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I started the list for a listing of our articles on individual artworks. Changing it from a list of articles to a list of artworks is a significant change. I'm certainly willing to discuss making that change if folks wish it, especially since we now have categories for keeping track of articles on subjects (which we didn't when this was started). Do we want to do that? If so, let's discuss. Someone want to add a few hundred red links into the article? Cheers, -- Infrogmation 19:25, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining that, I understand now. Generally, lists like these are in the Wikipedia namespace (Wikipedia:List of images, Wikipedia:Unusual articles, Wikipedia:Painting basic topics, etc.). That's why I was confused. • Benc • 20:16, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)