This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Art Gallery of Alberta article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
absolutely no information on collections or programming, but multiple paragraphs on the building and architect? article reads like the building is an empty shell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.130.49 ( talk) 18:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
i haven't even been inside the building, since i no longer live in edmonton, so i would feel uncomfortable adding and updating that information. but *something* has to be inside, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.53.43 ( talk) 16:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
The article portrays people's acceptance of the gallery as overwhelmingly positive, which it certainly is to some people, but there was a large degree of discontent with the amount of city/provincial funds spent on the gallery. This should be included. The art gallery was a very size-able expenditure during a time when the city overspent its budget and decided to sell off major assets from EPCOR, of which Edmonton was the sole owner and used to fund approximately 25% of its budget in recent years. It is not without merit that there is some controversy, and it is not trivial. Of course, the article should be balanced. The argument for the gallery, primarily being that a city should invest in its arts community, is a very valid point. The controversy and funding concerns should not go without mention though as they were/are public concerns that are relevant to the gallery. David.aloha ( talk) 11:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion to add a section on notable past exhibitions and publications. Need to ensure sources are balanced between AGA and others.
Some areas we can look for information include:
Viola-Ness ( talk) 20:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Expand Permanent Collection section to include other notable artists, including more women artists, and more images of work from the collection (either public domain or ones with ther permission of the artist) https://www.youraga.ca/about-aga/collection Expand Permanent Collection section to include notable indigenous artists collected through the notable Word Mark grant: https://www.youraga.ca/exhibitions/wordmark
Raejoymay ( talk) 18:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Art Gallery of Alberta article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
absolutely no information on collections or programming, but multiple paragraphs on the building and architect? article reads like the building is an empty shell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.130.49 ( talk) 18:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
i haven't even been inside the building, since i no longer live in edmonton, so i would feel uncomfortable adding and updating that information. but *something* has to be inside, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.53.43 ( talk) 16:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
The article portrays people's acceptance of the gallery as overwhelmingly positive, which it certainly is to some people, but there was a large degree of discontent with the amount of city/provincial funds spent on the gallery. This should be included. The art gallery was a very size-able expenditure during a time when the city overspent its budget and decided to sell off major assets from EPCOR, of which Edmonton was the sole owner and used to fund approximately 25% of its budget in recent years. It is not without merit that there is some controversy, and it is not trivial. Of course, the article should be balanced. The argument for the gallery, primarily being that a city should invest in its arts community, is a very valid point. The controversy and funding concerns should not go without mention though as they were/are public concerns that are relevant to the gallery. David.aloha ( talk) 11:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion to add a section on notable past exhibitions and publications. Need to ensure sources are balanced between AGA and others.
Some areas we can look for information include:
Viola-Ness ( talk) 20:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Expand Permanent Collection section to include other notable artists, including more women artists, and more images of work from the collection (either public domain or ones with ther permission of the artist) https://www.youraga.ca/about-aga/collection Expand Permanent Collection section to include notable indigenous artists collected through the notable Word Mark grant: https://www.youraga.ca/exhibitions/wordmark
Raejoymay ( talk) 18:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)