This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
I added a new picture, could someone format the page? Thanks! -Hairchrm 03:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
The painting The Plowing in the Nivernais currently shown is by AUGUSTE Bonheur, NOT Rosa Bonheur. Somebody uploaded the wrong painting. Both sisters made paintings of the same name.
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Over time I will attempt to fix this article, but it must be said that at present it is a total mess. There are so many egregious errors of fact here that it boggles the mind. Paintings are/were miss-named, said to be in the wrong locations, genders of persons described were switched, politicians and religious figures became painting instructors, occurrences are out of order. It is probably the worst article I have stumbled upon on the Wiki. Yikes! Saudade7 18:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
More of her pictures would be good. Like
, Hafspajen ( talk) 16:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
File:André Adolphe-Eugène Disdéri (French - (Rosa Bonheur) - Google Art Project.jpg file is better than the last picture used of her, I think it would be an improvment ... Hafspajen ( talk) 18:17, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
This edit by AyeolaWhitworth2 was reverted because of improper citation formatting, not because sources were unreliable (as stated here). With correct formatting and further verification such an edit may be more appropriate. Coldcreation ( talk) 07:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Anna Klumpke - Portrait of Rosa Bonheur (1898).jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on 8 November 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-11-08. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 17:05, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
This oil-on-canvas portrait of Bonheur, titled Rosa Bonheur, was completed in 1898 by American artist Anna Elizabeth Klumpke, a long-time admirer of Bonheur's work.Painting: Anna Klumpke
When trying to clean up the references, I found a link to Janson&Janson (History of Art). It has an ISBN nr. But this number points to an edition that has no text on Bonheur on p. 674 (at least not according to the Google books version. Which edition is meant? Is it ISBN 0-13-182895-9 ( Google Books), OCLC 941422507, so Rev. 6th ed., 2004 (Upper Saddle River, N.J. Prentice-Hall) and is the page nr. 674 correct for the credits in footnote 4 (end of lead section)? Or is a different edition used? There is another ref to J&J at footnote 25! Please help! -- Dick Bos ( talk) 07:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Have I actually read the article? Maybe not, although I thought I had read it, and also Wikipedia articles in other languages. My impression was that the article in English was a tad overboard, hence my messages on this discussion page. But hey, if it turns out that I was wrong, so be it! 02:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msbbb ( talk • contribs)
Voice concern 2402:8100:2563:41E7:90E6:D053:CB53:EB5 ( talk) 01:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Please fix the statement in “Personal life and legacy” that says, ‘Until 2013 women in France were forbidden from wearing trousers…’ 2600:1000:B10A:AEA6:A054:79FD:8B07:55C ( talk) 11:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
This article focuses unnecessarily on Bonheur's sexuality, mentioning "lesbian" no less than six times. It also gratuitously brings up lesbian sexual positions, which are completely irrelevant to her art. I can only imaging whomever wrote this threw that in because it's all they can think about whenever they learn a woman is not straight.
Please remove the unnecessary mentions of lesbianism and help make this article more equal to those about male artists and more respectful of Bonheur as a person, not just a lesbian. 2600:1017:B0A0:5F23:E55F:6936:EEB3:9D9D ( talk) 13:04, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
I agree that "Although she was a lesbian, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual" should be taken out completely. Clarence Patch ( talk) 19:38, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please help me with... Rosa Bonheur Hello! The third paragraph of the "Personal life and legacy" section of this article is offensive and insipid. "Her romantic life was that of a lesbian. However, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual." How would we even have evidence of that? Unless there's a personal journal with her thoughts on sex, we have no reason to even comment on it. Clicking on the source also neither confirms nor denies her sexual life. The idea that queer people must have rumors on their sexual habits included on their own page is so so stupid and useless. This paragraph also includes " At a time when lesbian sex – particularly tribadism – was regarded as animalistic and deranged by most French officials, Bonheur's outspokenness about her personal life was groundbreaking." At no point is tribadism brought up in the citation. This is a salacious and voyeuristic implication for no reason. If the citation cited a French newspaper that condemned her openness with her favorite sexual positions, then fine. But it doesn't. I've never edited a Wikipedia article before so I'm not sure about removing or editing these two lines that add nothing of substance to the article, especially of someone that is in the spotlight today. 136.176.177.106 ( talk) 15:22, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
There has been much discussion on this talk page regarding whether the information on her sexuality is superfluous, but it seems to me that the focus on her sexuality is at the right amount, but more information is required for other sections of the article. Her lesbianism shouldn't be stated as fact, because this is a WP:BIOGRAPHY page, and she never (As I have seen) referred to herself as such. Cassie Schebel, almost a savant. <3 ( talk) 20:21, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Who is in favor of removing "Although she was a lesbian, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual"?That statement seems illogical and contradictory. In no way would she have been able to directly claim the sexual nature of her relationships due to the period she lived in. I read the 1981 article that was cited and it seems outdated and borderline homophobic. Clarence Patch ( talk) 19:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
There are a lot of completely false claims about the so-called Rosa "lesbianism". She might have been lesbian, or not, but no fact support this claim. And the claim that "she was open about her lesbianism" is absolutely not grounded. Hervegirod ( talk) 12:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
I added a new picture, could someone format the page? Thanks! -Hairchrm 03:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
The painting The Plowing in the Nivernais currently shown is by AUGUSTE Bonheur, NOT Rosa Bonheur. Somebody uploaded the wrong painting. Both sisters made paintings of the same name.
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Over time I will attempt to fix this article, but it must be said that at present it is a total mess. There are so many egregious errors of fact here that it boggles the mind. Paintings are/were miss-named, said to be in the wrong locations, genders of persons described were switched, politicians and religious figures became painting instructors, occurrences are out of order. It is probably the worst article I have stumbled upon on the Wiki. Yikes! Saudade7 18:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
More of her pictures would be good. Like
, Hafspajen ( talk) 16:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
File:André Adolphe-Eugène Disdéri (French - (Rosa Bonheur) - Google Art Project.jpg file is better than the last picture used of her, I think it would be an improvment ... Hafspajen ( talk) 18:17, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
This edit by AyeolaWhitworth2 was reverted because of improper citation formatting, not because sources were unreliable (as stated here). With correct formatting and further verification such an edit may be more appropriate. Coldcreation ( talk) 07:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Anna Klumpke - Portrait of Rosa Bonheur (1898).jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on 8 November 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-11-08. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 17:05, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
This oil-on-canvas portrait of Bonheur, titled Rosa Bonheur, was completed in 1898 by American artist Anna Elizabeth Klumpke, a long-time admirer of Bonheur's work.Painting: Anna Klumpke
When trying to clean up the references, I found a link to Janson&Janson (History of Art). It has an ISBN nr. But this number points to an edition that has no text on Bonheur on p. 674 (at least not according to the Google books version. Which edition is meant? Is it ISBN 0-13-182895-9 ( Google Books), OCLC 941422507, so Rev. 6th ed., 2004 (Upper Saddle River, N.J. Prentice-Hall) and is the page nr. 674 correct for the credits in footnote 4 (end of lead section)? Or is a different edition used? There is another ref to J&J at footnote 25! Please help! -- Dick Bos ( talk) 07:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Have I actually read the article? Maybe not, although I thought I had read it, and also Wikipedia articles in other languages. My impression was that the article in English was a tad overboard, hence my messages on this discussion page. But hey, if it turns out that I was wrong, so be it! 02:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msbbb ( talk • contribs)
Voice concern 2402:8100:2563:41E7:90E6:D053:CB53:EB5 ( talk) 01:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Please fix the statement in “Personal life and legacy” that says, ‘Until 2013 women in France were forbidden from wearing trousers…’ 2600:1000:B10A:AEA6:A054:79FD:8B07:55C ( talk) 11:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
This article focuses unnecessarily on Bonheur's sexuality, mentioning "lesbian" no less than six times. It also gratuitously brings up lesbian sexual positions, which are completely irrelevant to her art. I can only imaging whomever wrote this threw that in because it's all they can think about whenever they learn a woman is not straight.
Please remove the unnecessary mentions of lesbianism and help make this article more equal to those about male artists and more respectful of Bonheur as a person, not just a lesbian. 2600:1017:B0A0:5F23:E55F:6936:EEB3:9D9D ( talk) 13:04, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
I agree that "Although she was a lesbian, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual" should be taken out completely. Clarence Patch ( talk) 19:38, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please help me with... Rosa Bonheur Hello! The third paragraph of the "Personal life and legacy" section of this article is offensive and insipid. "Her romantic life was that of a lesbian. However, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual." How would we even have evidence of that? Unless there's a personal journal with her thoughts on sex, we have no reason to even comment on it. Clicking on the source also neither confirms nor denies her sexual life. The idea that queer people must have rumors on their sexual habits included on their own page is so so stupid and useless. This paragraph also includes " At a time when lesbian sex – particularly tribadism – was regarded as animalistic and deranged by most French officials, Bonheur's outspokenness about her personal life was groundbreaking." At no point is tribadism brought up in the citation. This is a salacious and voyeuristic implication for no reason. If the citation cited a French newspaper that condemned her openness with her favorite sexual positions, then fine. But it doesn't. I've never edited a Wikipedia article before so I'm not sure about removing or editing these two lines that add nothing of substance to the article, especially of someone that is in the spotlight today. 136.176.177.106 ( talk) 15:22, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
There has been much discussion on this talk page regarding whether the information on her sexuality is superfluous, but it seems to me that the focus on her sexuality is at the right amount, but more information is required for other sections of the article. Her lesbianism shouldn't be stated as fact, because this is a WP:BIOGRAPHY page, and she never (As I have seen) referred to herself as such. Cassie Schebel, almost a savant. <3 ( talk) 20:21, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Who is in favor of removing "Although she was a lesbian, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual"?That statement seems illogical and contradictory. In no way would she have been able to directly claim the sexual nature of her relationships due to the period she lived in. I read the 1981 article that was cited and it seems outdated and borderline homophobic. Clarence Patch ( talk) 19:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
There are a lot of completely false claims about the so-called Rosa "lesbianism". She might have been lesbian, or not, but no fact support this claim. And the claim that "she was open about her lesbianism" is absolutely not grounded. Hervegirod ( talk) 12:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)