Talk:A Man with a Quilted Sleeve
 | A fact from A Man with a Quilted Sleeve appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 March 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on A Man with a Quilted Sleeve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110804124552/http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk:80/paintings/titian-a-man-with-a-quilted-sleeve to http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/titian-a-man-with-a-quilted-sleeve
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:39, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Authorship[edit]
There's an entire section (§ Attribution, date and condition) in the article that starts off with The work's attribution and dating are based on its style, its ambiguous signature, and comparison with other Titian works
and goes on to say "TV" might be Titian's
and the signature had been added to by a later hand, so that it read TITIANUS
. So shouldn't we lead off with something more conservative like "attributed to Titian" instead? —howcheng {chat} 17:45, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- No we should absolutely should not. The painting has been much discussed, and the authorship, unlike the the sitter, has never been seriously questioned for many decades, or any other painter suggested. Many, many paintings had hopeful old attributions to Giorgione, which are now disregarded. "Attributed to" means something very different and is the purest OR. Few paintings of this period, especially portraits, have original signatures. Johnbod (talk) 18:05, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
POTD[edit]
