User talk:VivaItalia1974

Welcome!

Hello, VivaItalia1974, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Mushroom (Talk) 07:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doni Tondo

The idea of citations is that you use things that agree with what you are saying, not say exactly what you have removed! Please also learn how to format web references properly, which is simple using []. Johnbod (talk) 12:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In each of the link, I provided state that Doni Tondo is the sole unanimously accepted Michelangelo,

what is your agenda here? 1) To educate me on how to use or edit wikipedia?
2) or to create credible article about Michelangelo's panel Doni Tondo?

Both of these, obviously. Johnbod (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3) Or to spread incorrect information by claiming full attribution to some questionable Michelangelo's panels when actually they are not fully attributed?

You need to read WP:UNDUE. Obviously, especially on Michelangelo, you can find one academic saying any kind of strange thing, but your own sources, including the Uffizi, are happy there are three adult paintings. One might query your agenda. Johnbod (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1) Yes I'm new to Wikipedia, so I'm not as fluent as you in editing or referencing, etc
2) Calling it 'only undisputed' or 'only unanimous' is the most credible term to describe the work, not by referencing a newly-discovered-overnight Michelangelo in Kimbell.

The Kimbell is not an issue. You removed the statement that he painted 3 panels, while adding a reference from the Uffizi confirming just that point. Objective? Johnbod (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3) If you go around the web or even in art books and such, words like attribution, disputed, workshop of, etc are still much being used to describe National Gallery panels (we leave Kimbell's art panet out for now) That means some parties are not ready to give full attribution to those panels yet (Given National Gallery history of attributing lesser panels to masters(read about NG's Giorgione scandal)

It's not me who needs to prove whether Doni Tondo's is the sole unanimously accepted Michelangelo's work, it is you who needs to provide citations that both panels in UK and Kimbell's panel are fully attributed to Michelangelo - VivaItalia1974

But you have kindly done just that, except for the Kimbel, which is not an issue here! Johnbod (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not denying that there are other attributed Michelangelo's panel. What I'm trying to convey is that while there are other attributed Michelangelo's panels, Doni Tondo is the only one undisputed and completed. I don't know why you're persistent in denying that? are you trying to say that both panels in the UK are also universally accepted as Michelangelo?? that's preposterous!! Not the entire art community is behind that idea, there are others who still oppose that those panels are fully attributed to Michelangelo - VivaItalia1974

Can't you see that the phrasing you have insisted on re-adding is just not very informative? It raises questions whose answers you have removed. Johnbod (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No I think the phrase is as clear as it gets, Dony Tondo is the only undisputed Michelangelo's panel. Period. I dont know why you're trying to make it more complicated than that. VivaItalia1974

Italian masterpieces

Hi, I have edited the Doni Tondo generally, and moved the "only undisputed" point to lower down, where it can be given context (ie naming the other paintings), and reflecting the balance of scholarly views. I suggest we leave it there.

I notice the list you are working up on your user page. I have to say this is unlikely to survive if moved to article space. The page is essentially a large gallery, which many people don't like - Wikipedia used to be full of these, but they have mostly been removed - see WP:GALLERY. Also I presume the choice iof works is subjective, which also won't be liked. I don't feel strongly on these issues myself, and won't oppose it, but others will. People will say "move it to Commons", and that is a possibility. Johnbod (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the idea is to turn this into an article, at least the text format if not in gallery format. Though I'm sure audience would like it more in gallery format, so they dont have to click each link to see how the painting looks like.

The goal of the article is to give overview of the treasures of Italy. Unlike in countries like the US, UK, France or Spain, where all of masterpieces are concentrated in a handful major museums, that's not the case in Italy. They are spread in dozens of museums, big ones, small ones, and even in churches (The best of Titian, Caravaggio, Bellini, Mantegna, Giorgione, etc are still in churches in Italy, not in their museums). And unlike other Western Countries where the museums are well-funded and they have nice and informative websites (and often with multiple language options), many Italian museums, even the major ones, don't have their own websites, let alone the churches.

So my idea to have all these masterpiece paintings in Italy listed in one article. I'm going to start with panel paintings, then frescoes, then sculptures, ancient sculptures, etc. So yeah, it's a long term project of mine.

I'm not sure what you say is true of Britain, where country houses and smaller museums still have major works, or France or the US. But anyway, subjectivity of choice is likely to be a problem. Johnbod (talk) 03:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'm aware of famous small collections in the UK like Wallace Collection or John Soane House, those are well-established, well-known museums. In Italy, those are more comparable to Galleria Borghese, Galleria Doria-Pamphilj, Poldi-Pezzoli, Magnani-Rocca, Ambrosiana, Giorgioe-Franchetti, etc which are pretty well-known, well-funded small galleries/house museums. I'm talking more on the level of community or little town museums. In Italy they're known as regionale or communale or civico museums or diocesano museums. For example in the little town of Sansepolcro, the pinacoteca has a couple of major Piero della Francesca pieces, plus some works by Luca Signorreli, Rosso Fiorentino, etc. In the little town of Prato, the civic museum has works by Lippi, Signorelli, Monaco, etc. In the town of Ancona, the regional museum has 2 huge Titian altarpieces, plus Lotto, and oter artists. Same story in towns like Cortona, Lucca, Iesi, Recanati, Brescia, Spoleto, San Gimignano, Volterra, Pavia, Cefalu, Puglia, Correggio, Castelfranco, etc.

Feedback on new version of The Birth of Venus?

Hi, you noted that my image File:Sandro Botticelli - La nascita di Venere - Google Art Project - edited.jpg (based on File:Sandro Botticelli - La nascita di Venere - Google Art Project.jpg) was excessively brightened. I wanted to run a thumbnail of a new version by you (see [1]) to see if it's closer to the right tones. Thanks! Dcoetzee 03:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yeah that's better

Thanks! I'll go ahead and upload it over my edited version at full resolution. By the way, I wanted to let you know that you can sign your posts using "~~~~" at the end. This will let other people easily see that you're the one writing the comment. Dcoetzee 04:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Viva! Thank you xox K Laura R Drake pHd ;) (talk) 09:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Treasures of Italy concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Treasures of Italy, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Treasures of Italy

Hello, VivaItalia1974. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Treasures of Italy".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 19:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]