This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A fact from Welsh art appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
I removed the 'selected' list of Welsh artists because there is a more comprehensive list elsewhere on Wikipedia. Johnbod reverted this. Can I ask who is 'selecting' this list and what the membership criteria is? If someone is making a subjective decision about which artists are more impotant than others, that is WP:OR. Sionk (talk) 22:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I concur, most of the artists are mentioned in the article, as they should be, so this subsection is surplus to requirements. Lists in standard pages should always be challenged, they normally appear in articles when they are stubs until better information is added. Add List of Welsh artists to 'see also' and remove the section from this article. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, and the "more comprehensive list" appears itself to be a selection, being shorter than the category that was previously linked, but Sionk removed for no reason. Nobody objects or whines OR when artists are "selected" for mention in the text, so why object to a list. Johnbod (talk) 02:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't start it, but expanded it to include anyone in the category at that point who seemed significant in any way as an artist and significantly Welsh. So not eg Koppel (lived in Wales 15 years) or the rock band guy. It may well be missing people. Lists of artists are in fact extremely common, if not the norm, in art by nation or art by movement articles, including repetition of those already mentioned. I see no harm in them while the article remains fairly short. Johnbod (talk) 02:57, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Augustus John and Gwen John left Wales as soon as they could. So maybe they should be removed too?! Maybe a compromise (and improvement) would be to justify each of the inclusions on the list. For example Richard Wilson was described as "the most distinguished painter Wales has ever produced". List articles, such as List of Welsh people, don't give much opportunity to expand on each entry, while a 'selected' list in a fuller article invites a bit of expansion. Sionk (talk) 13:39, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Caradog Llywelyn (talk) 11:23, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I've added Wales at the Venice Biennale as a sub-heading but then realised that maybe Artes Mundi is just as relevant. Both these are small items and should maybe not have a sub-heading...At the moment at least; until someone expands on them. I'll remove the sub-heading for now.Caradog Llywelyn (talk) 11:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Just realised they both started in 2003, so I've put them under the same heading
Caradog Llywelyn (talk) 11:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
