User talk:Hindsite

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Hindsite, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- RHaworth 16:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:David-fried portrait2.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:David-fried portrait2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Fried (September 14)[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! RGloucester — 📬 17:19, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Street Art article[edit]

Hi there Hindsite, I'll be beginning serious revisions to the above article and I noticed you were the most recent contributor. I announced my intentions on that article's TALK page, just thought I'd let you know about it here too because I'm not some random contributor, BUT, my revisions will be done in stages that may seem random, and I'd hate to set off some kind of edit-war or incite vandalism — in fact your help/input is welcome, and if there's any way I can help you please do get in touch. We seem to be knowledgeable of history which overlaps. Penwatchdog (talk) 09:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replying here to keep from crowding the article's TALK page, thanks for getting in touch there though! I didn't add/write the "anything that is not graffiti" bit; that existed prior to my appearance here (I suspect self-promotional contribution by Fekner himself; harmless regardless, but for now I've moved that further down into the article instead of its original location in the intro, and I'll put it into context at some point during revisions). Actually I haven't done any textual revisions yet, just some preparatory juggling as I get a better bearing on what needs to be done; there's just too much to revise/add there, please do jump into it yourself too! I've decided I'll do some preliminary snipping to the lengthy "Key locations" section. Has to be done! Kiss unsourced fluff bye-bye! About Rene: like-him-or-not his murals left their mark, so to speak, and it had nothing to do with him actually thinking he's the "best artist"; it was an act of "art provocation" just as John Strausbaugh credited it in his NY Press cover story. I'll also add context within upcoming additions; and Basquiat; and later punks as Missing Foundation's "party's over" upside down martini glass. And of course Haring. Problem with images is securing usable imagery; I haven't yet mastered the "fair use rationale" so I'm using whats already available within wiki-world, but if you can add, GREAT! Text too, by all means contribute! My contributions here will have limitations anyway because wiki-time is always limited, so, for now just a-bit-at-a-time! Me: born-&-raised New Yorker... Rene's first IATBA mural appeared around 1979 (1980 at latest), but didn't really grab public attention until their numbers had grown by around 1984.Penwatchdog (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gotcha - my compliment was about your restructuring of the article so far, also your approach, and indeed I was refering to what what already written possibly from Fekner:)

About Rene, thanks for your take, i see your point of notability. Yet I still see it primarily as notable local and arty sign-painting, and while it's true he got noticed for that, it bears no resemblance to his relatively unknown studio artworks, thus advertisement? Wow! Missing Foundation, Samo... great! All belong in historical section. I may have some images to to scan.. mostly it's an AVANT slide archive, gotta look through them when i get a chance.Hindsite (talk) 17:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

David Fried article[edit]

By the way: I took a look at the David Freid article, here're some problems... For one, it lacks reliable neutral 3rd-party reviews/sources. For wikipedia's purposes, it's not enough that someone simply "did" something; there has to be some fair amount of COVERAGE of it; reportage; critique, by sources unrelated to the artist and/or with an editorial process in place. Anything in the Village Voice? Pre-internet is fine if you've got the hard-copy and can provide all the fine-print. Next: the article reads like a resume. If you're gonna list exhibitions, each exhibition needs a reference, as in a review, etc, otherwise you'll need to cut that list down! (actually the list is way too long anyway: CUT!) And the artist's own website is usable but can't be the dominant resource. Also: you've got to be really careful with adjectives; nothing with any kind of floweriness to it: JUST the facts, straight up, no mixer, no chaser, no cherry on top (UNLESS you're pulling from a 3rd party source, in which case you'd word it as: "So-&-so, in a New York Herald review of Freid's 1999 Jello exhibition, described the artist's work as sublimely inviting"). Lastly, study existing wikipedia pages and get a feeling for the formatting: brief overview as an intro paragraph, then break other info into neat sections: "Early life", "Early career", "Art education", "Move to Europe" just as examples. Gotta run right now, keep in touch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penwatchdog (talk • contribs) 15:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks for your time and critique on my Fried article!! (AVANT member). I do not consider myself skilled in writing - especially in this form:) In spite of reading all the guidelines, other artist articles, and vague helpdesk anwers, your comments have helped tremendously for me to "get it". I will cut down the lists, make sections, and a few weeks ago, I already removed the "Works" section which was sourced entirely from books.(they were directly quoted, so I must rewrite them completely.)
  • Yes, there are village voice, NY Times, books with ISBNs and a host of third party sources referenced(some even scaned and online for quick proof) so I am still not sure what is insufficient there. His early press from the AVANT time is in english, whereby his later press is mostly in German, so- do you think it's allowed to quote sources that I have translated myself? "Pre-internet is fine if you've got the hard-copy and can provide all the fine-print." All AVANT is pre internet, but also retrieved by the Avant website: http://avant-streetart.com/avant_street_art_press_nyc_80s.htm
  • About adjectives; thanks! I tried to be careful:) for instance I used the term "major" works to reflect the difference between insignificant and significant contributions selected and featured by major museums for all-star shows. On the museum printed invites, out of dozens of artists his work is pictured among only a few, and in all press releases his work is always metioned. Without mucking up the short mention of inclusion in such shows with press release quotes, how else to convey this? Thanks again, you have already made my day! Hindsite (talk) 11:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hello there, I've just spent some time at Street art, which is slowly looking more like the encyclopedic page it ought to be! Will continue a little bit tomorrow; very tired, this is not easy work, especially "for free".

Here's more for you to mull over: For wikipedia, it's all about the source material, Hindsite. Not only the providing of the details for confirmation, but the contents as well. What you add to an article is not about what you think or know, it's all about what others have written about the subject. That's the information which is permissible on wikipedia, with the proper proof. Your thoughts on the matter are virtually irrelevant, you're merely delivering the news. Wikipedia is not like facebook; some articles may read that way, but those articles, as you'll notice, usually get "tagged" very quickly, as lacking sources, having promotional content, etc, etc and may soon suddenly disappear. Wikipedia editors get around to everything, just as I got around to the street art article! "Advanced" wikipedia editors have access to archives of the New York Times and Village Voice (that is, there are archives of such publications available to those who know how to access them). So, if you provide dates and page numbers and authors, and re-tell what they've written, it's all verifiable, and therefore usable. Fried's name on an invitation card is only proof he was in the exhibition and therefore only good as proof of the exhibition. Who else was in the exhibition: irrelevant; that is, it doesn't make Fried "notable". I've been in the same room and talked with The President; does that make me notable? The New York Times may write about an exhibition and mention Fried's name as a participant, but that's also only proof that he was in the exhibition; it's unfortunately not a sign of notability, or else everyone would have a wikipedia article. An article written solely about Fried and his artwork, given serious consideration in a publication with a neutral editorial policy, that's what's usable. You'll need several of those, including some kind of online attention showing there's continuing activity and recognition. Finally, it may also have to do with you: you're a new contributor suddenly submitting articles about a very specific person or group, with no prior/other contributions to show your neutrality in the matter. So wikipedia probably assumes you are Fried, or a member of Fried's group; that blows your neutrality, especially when your article is overly fawning; "peacock" terms as they say. That's about as much as I can advise, Hindsite. Don't get me wrong, I'm on your side but just stating the fact straight; I've had to answer to "senior" editors, too, and that's how it works here!

By the way, Rene's studio work did get plenty of press coverage (it's all there in the source material), just maybe not where you'd noticed? Anyway. Even more tired now! Penwatchdog (talk) 09:49, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Greets PWD, thank you!!! You have again been tirelessly very helpful! In general I welcome in-depth critique and debate, it's how we grow. Fortunately our dialogue has enightened me as to the essence of what is wrong with my approach and article, far more than the wiki-guidlines or senior editors have afforded me.

First contribution: I certainly get what you mean, yet in this fact and neutral sphere of editing, assumptions should surely not taint outcomes. Previously I made a written contribution to "street art" and included the book "beyond graffiti" plus a line about richard hambleton and avant, and some years ago I authored the AVANT page in its entirety, which after some dispute about notability, finally did get accepted. That said, my interest here is also in facts yet things i care about, and i am deterimed to contribute with neutrality on any subject where my interests and research are at all adequate:)

I met Rene on several occasions... liked him as a person very much! May i ask if you knew him? Beyond historical street art, there are contemporary "outsallations" worldwide that are quite powerful(peacock) that we can look into. i am a bit too busy now, but I will get back to you with some suggestions/research in the near future. Thanks again Hindsite (talk) 23:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Fried (October 15)[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ///EuroCarGT 01:58, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Hindsite. You have new messages at EuroCarGT's talk page.
Message added 22:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

///EuroCarGT 22:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried, 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) 01:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried[edit]

Hello Hindsite. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "David Fried".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 06:00, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried, 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) 01:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Fried has been accepted[edit]

David Fried, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 08:49, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Genesis-The art of creation, 2008, Zentrum Paul Klee, Bern.jpg[edit]

File:Genesis-The art of creation, 2008, Zentrum Paul Klee, Bern.jpg has been listed at c:Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Note that the discussion is taking place at Wikimedia Commons, not the English Wikipedia. Wikiacc () 21:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rainscape-no.4-2003.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rainscape-no.4-2003.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wikiacc () 13:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hindsite&oldid=1144717536"