This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bust of Otis Bowen 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 |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Bust of Otis Bowen be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Indianapolis may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment. |
The result of the move request was: moved all. The Untitled one will be discussed on its own page. Kotniski ( talk) 10:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The rationale behind disambiguators is to best assure that those looking for a topic will recognize the topic they are searching for among others of a possibly confusing title. Secondarily, those who just stumble upon a topic name, should get a glimmer of what might be behind the name looking at the disambiguator. I don't think the current disambiguators serve either purpose well. Only that small subset of people who come armed already knowing the name of the artist will have a clue what the surname in parentheses means. This also means that all other persons seeing these disambiguators will not have any ambiguity they experience remedied by reading the disambiguator. These articles are not covered by the example used at VAMOS of a super well known artist being the disambiguator—"(Picasso)"—an artist's name that will be recognized by a vast number. Only a very few artists fit this mold and none of the pages here do. When I see what looks like a person's name, followed a last name in parentheses, I have no idea what the article might be about. This would not be true were the names followed by "(sculpture)", "(bust)" "(statue)" ("painting)", etc. and this is the convention set forth at Wikipedia:Disambiguation, which also specifically provides that using proper nouns should be avoided:
- If the title is not very specific, or refers to a common subject, add the surname of the artist in brackets afterwards, e.g. Reading the Letter (Picasso). It is better to disambiguate by the artist's name than by medium, as there may be other paintings or sculptures of the same name by other artists.
- Avoid "Portrait of Fred Foo" titles, if the individual is named – just use "Fred Foo", with disambiguation as necessary, even if the museum uses "Portrait".
A disambiguating word or phrase can be added in parentheses. The word or phrase in parentheses should be:
- the generic class (avoiding proper nouns, as much as possible) that includes the topic, as in Mercury (element), Seal (mammal); or
- the subject or context to which the topic applies, as in Union (set theory), Inflation (economics).
One other issues with the last name rationale at VAMOS. We don't normally disambiguate for the possibility of future articles, but only for existing topics. Accordingly, the rationale provided that we should use last names because there "may be other paintings or sculptures of the same name by other artists" doesn't work for me; if those articles do not yet exist, we should disambiguate only against existing articles. If that inchoate, notable article is created, we can then further disambiguate by more specific art medium, e.g., "(bronze bust)" instead of (bust), by year, location, or even by the artist's last name, but only when that further disambiguation is needed.
So I see three possibilities. Keep these where they are; use a generic class disambiguator as WP:DAB provides, or use a descriptive title, such as "statue of ___". As shown by the names I've suggested on the moves, I think the second naming scheme is best. Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 07:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'm here to close this move request, if I can, but I'd first like to ask some questions.
Pending clarification on these two points, I think we can close this request and move the pages. - GTBacchus( talk) 04:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Based on above comments, this would appear to be the final list of moves to be made:
Any more suggestions?-- Kotniski ( talk) 12:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
For this one, I would suggest a descriptive title, something like "Sculptures by Mueller on Indiana Statehouse". Any further thoughts?-- Kotniski ( talk) 12:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
I just want to take a moment to thank you all for working through this issue so carefully and thoughtfully. I think that the names you have suggested really are appropriate, including the Mueller issue.
I'd only like to suggest a little more considering. For example with Abraham Lincoln (relief by Schwarz), it is possible that with such a prominent political figure as Lincoln that there could be multiple relieves, monuments, or statues created by the same artist. To this end, the question is if further disambiguation would be something like: Subject Name (type of artwork by artist at location in year) This seems like a good way to finalize disambiguation for artworks that do not have formal titles given.
Thanks,-- RichardMcCoy ( talk) 13:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Benjamin Harrison (bust) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 20:01, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bust of Otis Bowen 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 |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Bust of Otis Bowen be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Indianapolis may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment. |
The result of the move request was: moved all. The Untitled one will be discussed on its own page. Kotniski ( talk) 10:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The rationale behind disambiguators is to best assure that those looking for a topic will recognize the topic they are searching for among others of a possibly confusing title. Secondarily, those who just stumble upon a topic name, should get a glimmer of what might be behind the name looking at the disambiguator. I don't think the current disambiguators serve either purpose well. Only that small subset of people who come armed already knowing the name of the artist will have a clue what the surname in parentheses means. This also means that all other persons seeing these disambiguators will not have any ambiguity they experience remedied by reading the disambiguator. These articles are not covered by the example used at VAMOS of a super well known artist being the disambiguator—"(Picasso)"—an artist's name that will be recognized by a vast number. Only a very few artists fit this mold and none of the pages here do. When I see what looks like a person's name, followed a last name in parentheses, I have no idea what the article might be about. This would not be true were the names followed by "(sculpture)", "(bust)" "(statue)" ("painting)", etc. and this is the convention set forth at Wikipedia:Disambiguation, which also specifically provides that using proper nouns should be avoided:
- If the title is not very specific, or refers to a common subject, add the surname of the artist in brackets afterwards, e.g. Reading the Letter (Picasso). It is better to disambiguate by the artist's name than by medium, as there may be other paintings or sculptures of the same name by other artists.
- Avoid "Portrait of Fred Foo" titles, if the individual is named – just use "Fred Foo", with disambiguation as necessary, even if the museum uses "Portrait".
A disambiguating word or phrase can be added in parentheses. The word or phrase in parentheses should be:
- the generic class (avoiding proper nouns, as much as possible) that includes the topic, as in Mercury (element), Seal (mammal); or
- the subject or context to which the topic applies, as in Union (set theory), Inflation (economics).
One other issues with the last name rationale at VAMOS. We don't normally disambiguate for the possibility of future articles, but only for existing topics. Accordingly, the rationale provided that we should use last names because there "may be other paintings or sculptures of the same name by other artists" doesn't work for me; if those articles do not yet exist, we should disambiguate only against existing articles. If that inchoate, notable article is created, we can then further disambiguate by more specific art medium, e.g., "(bronze bust)" instead of (bust), by year, location, or even by the artist's last name, but only when that further disambiguation is needed.
So I see three possibilities. Keep these where they are; use a generic class disambiguator as WP:DAB provides, or use a descriptive title, such as "statue of ___". As shown by the names I've suggested on the moves, I think the second naming scheme is best. Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 07:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'm here to close this move request, if I can, but I'd first like to ask some questions.
Pending clarification on these two points, I think we can close this request and move the pages. - GTBacchus( talk) 04:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Based on above comments, this would appear to be the final list of moves to be made:
Any more suggestions?-- Kotniski ( talk) 12:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
For this one, I would suggest a descriptive title, something like "Sculptures by Mueller on Indiana Statehouse". Any further thoughts?-- Kotniski ( talk) 12:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
I just want to take a moment to thank you all for working through this issue so carefully and thoughtfully. I think that the names you have suggested really are appropriate, including the Mueller issue.
I'd only like to suggest a little more considering. For example with Abraham Lincoln (relief by Schwarz), it is possible that with such a prominent political figure as Lincoln that there could be multiple relieves, monuments, or statues created by the same artist. To this end, the question is if further disambiguation would be something like: Subject Name (type of artwork by artist at location in year) This seems like a good way to finalize disambiguation for artworks that do not have formal titles given.
Thanks,-- RichardMcCoy ( talk) 13:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Benjamin Harrison (bust) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 20:01, 21 July 2019 (UTC)