![]() | Charitable work by Stella Vine was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 29 October 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Stella Vine. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
I changed the headers, this article is not a timeline, and while a chronological order makes sense, it doesn't make sense to name them for years. I moved around some material to more relevant sections, and tried to provide a narrative structure form what sources tells us are the milestones. They might be inexact, and further splitting and merging might be needed. Feel free to do so.
A salient issue I noticed is that there is some information in the "Art" section that belongs in the "Life" section and vice-versa. While sometimes this is inescapable - after all the subject is an artist, d'oh - I think we could make an effort to eliminate redundancies and misplacements in this respect.
In addition, I think this is article is way too long for an artist whose career is barely 6 years old, we could shorten it by eliminating alot of the quotes, interviews and opinions, and stick to facts around the artist.
This is not meant as a comprehensive biography, but an encyclopedia article about a living person. For example, most of the details of the early life are of no concern in an encyclopedic biography.
Compare this bio to say, Jackson Pollock, and you will see what I mean.
An encyclopedic biography is not meant to be an all-inclusive review of a subject's life, nor is it more lenght necessarly better. From what I can see, we could cut this article in half and still have an article that covers this subject better than Jackson Pollock's does its subject. But this is open for further discussion, unlike my other edits which are pretty much snowball.-- Cerejota ( talk) 05:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
There was an edit by an anon editor that I am "controlling" this article about Stella Vine in order to "destroy her career". The edit has been oversighted because of BLP considerations about a named individual. I do not consider this allegation justified, and have posted to User talk:82.34.219.82 to request specific specific examples of any alleged bias to be stated here. It might be noted that 821 out of 1523 edits to this article have been made by User:Madeofstars. Comments about the article's conformity to wikipedi policy with regard to alleged bias are invited below. Ty 16:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Having looked at other Wikipedia articles featuring modern artists Francis Bacon, Salvador Dalí, Henry Moore, Pablo Picasso and Andy Warhol (two of the articles being featured articles), you find that pictures are used sparingly and are directly related to the article (being pictures of the artist, their work, and buildings/locations of note).
This article in contrast is littered with superfluous pictures, which add nothing to the article and make it look a mess. In fact this article more resembles a magazine article than an encyclopedia article.
I have therefore deleted the following superfluous pictures, which with the exception of the photo of Charles Thompson are all featured in the articles which are linked to in the main body text (the picture captions are all repetitions of text in the main body of the article).
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Memphisto ( talk • contribs)
A consensus was reached for article content by editors working on this article and reviewing it. You need to establish a new consensus, if you don't agree with that. I have therefore reverted your edit, which removed most of the images from the article. This is the article before image removals, [7] and after the image removals. [8] Your edit summary was "removed superfluous pictures (please see discussion: An Encyclopedia, not a Magazine)". [9]
According to the guideline, Wikipedia:Images#Image_choice_and_placement: "Articles that use more than one image should present a variety of material near relevant text. Three uniformed portraits would be redundant for a biography of a famous general. A map of a battle and a picture of its aftermath would provide more information to readers." A variety of images have been presented near relevant text in this article.
Also in Wikipedia:Images#Pertinence_and_encyclopedic_nature: "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly related to the article's topic." The images are relevant and significantly related. They all shows aspects of her life, experience, influences and relationships, which are in the text and referenced from reliable sources.
A rule of thumb is to "Try not to overwhelm the text with 'too many' pictures—one image or infographic every 250 words is a good guideline." [10] This ratio is advocated by others also. [11] [12] [13] The article is around 6,000 words, which by this rule of thumb equates to 24 images. There were 19 images in the article. The proposed removals reduce this to 4 images.
The decision as to what images are suitable is dictated by article content. If an aspect of the article is valid in words, then it is also valid in a picture, which is simply another way of communicating information, including that which cannot be easily put in words. The equation of images with a "magazine", when the same thing in text is deemed to be "encyclopedic" is an irrational prejudice against the visual as opposed to the literary. Far from being "superflous", images help the reader a great deal to engage with the subject and gain entry into the facets of it, especially when a reader may not be familiar with what something looks like.
It is not adequate to remove an image simply because it is in another article linked to in the text, if it is relevant to the subject of this article. Articles should be as complete as possible within themselves.
One reason for the lack of images in many articles is that they are not available and often severely restricted by wikipedia's fair use policy. This article benefits from the availability of free images, some taken by editors specially for it. It is not a question of paring this down to other image-poor articles, but of trying to bring them up to this standard, so the text is properly complemented by pictures: "Images aren't a requirement for any Featured Article, but asking for specific parts of articles which would benefit from having an image to be more illustrated is a valid objection." [14]
The image captions need to be pared down, and once the images are agreed on, this will be a simple job.
Ty 19:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Word count per section is a rough guide. Ty 19:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
There is no need to reach a new consensus for the Stella Vine article, the consensus already exists within the following related articles - Francis Bacon, Salvador Dalí, Henry Moore, Henri Matisse, Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Andy Warhol and living artists articles Banksy, Tracey Emin, Jeff Koons and David Hockney. (I would again point out that the Salvador Dalí and Henry Moore articles have been featured articles – the very best articles on Wikipedia).
The use of pictures in these articles is limited to:
Pictures of the artist alone or with others.
Pictures of the artists work.
Pictures of buildings/locations of note to the artist.
As for the word/picture ratio, this would apply only to pictures that already meet the above requirements.
The pictures I have deleted do not meet these standards.
Memphisto (
talk) 13:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Chancing across this article again, I've cut the following images as misleading:-
I've also clarified in the caption that the Windmill Theatre photo is not a contemporary one. -- McGeddon ( talk) 17:13, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
It is difficult to criticise something that so much work has gone into but I'll put this out there in the hope that it will ultimately result in better coverage of this subject. Currently this page and the others associated with it ( The art of Stella Vine, Talks and collaborations by Stella Vine, Charitable work by Stella Vine, Charles Thomson, Stella Vine, and the Stuckists, and Rosy Wilde) look a little bit like some kind of Stella Vine Internet Scrapbook rather than encyclopedia entries. They abound in trivia (she liked the TV series Bagpuss, she used to listen to PJ Harvey, plans for Christmas, etc), anecdotal information, surplus background material and long passages in need of summarising. These pages do a real disservice to an interesting contemporary painter and anyone wanting to research her. Maybe a consensus can be established that the content of the numerous Stella Vine pages be merged back to one critically edited, well-rounded and coherent page and that this should be illustrated with examples of her work and not photographs of people that she happens to have painted pictures of, people that she has been compared to or places that she lived near to. I hope that this comment will be taken in the spirit of constructive criticism in which it is intended. -- Nofoto ( talk) 08:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I came here accidentally but can't believe the amount of detailed material in this article about - let's be honest - a very minor/peripheral artist. A brief outline of her life and career highlights would suffice. I'm not sure that we need quite so many photographs of places where she apparently once lived. And photographs of subjects that she once painted. Ok, if that important, show the paintings but why the need for, say, a photo of Drogba? This is a self-written entry isn't it? No-one other than the subject could possibly have such a forensic interest in her life. Doesn't do Wikipedia any favours.... Twizzlemas ( talk) 20:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Charitable work by Stella Vine was recently deleted and merged with this article. The art of Stella Vine has been tagged as another possible merge since February 2012, with no discussion - I've changed the templates to point to this discussion here, and proposed the same merge for Talks and collaborations by Stella Vine. All three articles have an uneven amount of overlap and would be better combined into a single, clear article. "Talks and collaborations" seems particularly thin, as it appears to be including every possible press interview Vine has given. ("In the same month, Vine told The Guardian that she would spend Christmas Day 2008 with a run around the Serpentine, or a walk in Hyde Park or across London town with her son's bullmastiff dog and a small haversack of whisky and coffee.") I've put a fourth article, Charles Thomson, Stella Vine, and the Stuckists up for deletion, suggesting it be merged with Vine and Thomson's articles. -- McGeddon ( talk) 08:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
In the absence of any disagreement, I've gone ahead and started by merging The art of Stella Vine into this article, as well as trimming some of the trivia and less-significant-seeming quotes from critics and Vine herself. -- McGeddon ( talk) 10:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Template:Stella Vine has been nominated for deletion. Sionk ( talk) 12:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I meant to put a link back to the AfD where I mentioned it, but added the template with a widget and forgot to.
User:Madeofstars spent about a year writing this and other Stella Vine articles, and crowbarring mentions of Vine into tenuously-connected pages - this talk page list from 2009 shows that Madeofstars has shown a strong emotional bias towards Vine and against her detractors, the user briefly self-identified as "a big fan" of Vine, and from other user-talk threads seems to have been personally present at several of Vine's shows, and has been acting as an email go-between to get Wikipedia's permission to use images. Assuming good faith and concluding this is just a Vine superfan who's taken amateur video footage of her shows and wants to fight Vine's corner at Wikipedia, it is potentially close to a "personal connection to a topic or person" and "people with whom you could reasonably be said to have an antagonistic relationship in real life" WP:COS, and we should look at this whole article - and any which we merge into it - on that basis. -- McGeddon ( talk) 18:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Stella Vine. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:23, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Stella Vine. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:05, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Charitable work by Stella Vine was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 29 October 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Stella Vine. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
I changed the headers, this article is not a timeline, and while a chronological order makes sense, it doesn't make sense to name them for years. I moved around some material to more relevant sections, and tried to provide a narrative structure form what sources tells us are the milestones. They might be inexact, and further splitting and merging might be needed. Feel free to do so.
A salient issue I noticed is that there is some information in the "Art" section that belongs in the "Life" section and vice-versa. While sometimes this is inescapable - after all the subject is an artist, d'oh - I think we could make an effort to eliminate redundancies and misplacements in this respect.
In addition, I think this is article is way too long for an artist whose career is barely 6 years old, we could shorten it by eliminating alot of the quotes, interviews and opinions, and stick to facts around the artist.
This is not meant as a comprehensive biography, but an encyclopedia article about a living person. For example, most of the details of the early life are of no concern in an encyclopedic biography.
Compare this bio to say, Jackson Pollock, and you will see what I mean.
An encyclopedic biography is not meant to be an all-inclusive review of a subject's life, nor is it more lenght necessarly better. From what I can see, we could cut this article in half and still have an article that covers this subject better than Jackson Pollock's does its subject. But this is open for further discussion, unlike my other edits which are pretty much snowball.-- Cerejota ( talk) 05:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
There was an edit by an anon editor that I am "controlling" this article about Stella Vine in order to "destroy her career". The edit has been oversighted because of BLP considerations about a named individual. I do not consider this allegation justified, and have posted to User talk:82.34.219.82 to request specific specific examples of any alleged bias to be stated here. It might be noted that 821 out of 1523 edits to this article have been made by User:Madeofstars. Comments about the article's conformity to wikipedi policy with regard to alleged bias are invited below. Ty 16:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Having looked at other Wikipedia articles featuring modern artists Francis Bacon, Salvador Dalí, Henry Moore, Pablo Picasso and Andy Warhol (two of the articles being featured articles), you find that pictures are used sparingly and are directly related to the article (being pictures of the artist, their work, and buildings/locations of note).
This article in contrast is littered with superfluous pictures, which add nothing to the article and make it look a mess. In fact this article more resembles a magazine article than an encyclopedia article.
I have therefore deleted the following superfluous pictures, which with the exception of the photo of Charles Thompson are all featured in the articles which are linked to in the main body text (the picture captions are all repetitions of text in the main body of the article).
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Memphisto ( talk • contribs)
A consensus was reached for article content by editors working on this article and reviewing it. You need to establish a new consensus, if you don't agree with that. I have therefore reverted your edit, which removed most of the images from the article. This is the article before image removals, [7] and after the image removals. [8] Your edit summary was "removed superfluous pictures (please see discussion: An Encyclopedia, not a Magazine)". [9]
According to the guideline, Wikipedia:Images#Image_choice_and_placement: "Articles that use more than one image should present a variety of material near relevant text. Three uniformed portraits would be redundant for a biography of a famous general. A map of a battle and a picture of its aftermath would provide more information to readers." A variety of images have been presented near relevant text in this article.
Also in Wikipedia:Images#Pertinence_and_encyclopedic_nature: "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly related to the article's topic." The images are relevant and significantly related. They all shows aspects of her life, experience, influences and relationships, which are in the text and referenced from reliable sources.
A rule of thumb is to "Try not to overwhelm the text with 'too many' pictures—one image or infographic every 250 words is a good guideline." [10] This ratio is advocated by others also. [11] [12] [13] The article is around 6,000 words, which by this rule of thumb equates to 24 images. There were 19 images in the article. The proposed removals reduce this to 4 images.
The decision as to what images are suitable is dictated by article content. If an aspect of the article is valid in words, then it is also valid in a picture, which is simply another way of communicating information, including that which cannot be easily put in words. The equation of images with a "magazine", when the same thing in text is deemed to be "encyclopedic" is an irrational prejudice against the visual as opposed to the literary. Far from being "superflous", images help the reader a great deal to engage with the subject and gain entry into the facets of it, especially when a reader may not be familiar with what something looks like.
It is not adequate to remove an image simply because it is in another article linked to in the text, if it is relevant to the subject of this article. Articles should be as complete as possible within themselves.
One reason for the lack of images in many articles is that they are not available and often severely restricted by wikipedia's fair use policy. This article benefits from the availability of free images, some taken by editors specially for it. It is not a question of paring this down to other image-poor articles, but of trying to bring them up to this standard, so the text is properly complemented by pictures: "Images aren't a requirement for any Featured Article, but asking for specific parts of articles which would benefit from having an image to be more illustrated is a valid objection." [14]
The image captions need to be pared down, and once the images are agreed on, this will be a simple job.
Ty 19:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Word count per section is a rough guide. Ty 19:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
There is no need to reach a new consensus for the Stella Vine article, the consensus already exists within the following related articles - Francis Bacon, Salvador Dalí, Henry Moore, Henri Matisse, Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Andy Warhol and living artists articles Banksy, Tracey Emin, Jeff Koons and David Hockney. (I would again point out that the Salvador Dalí and Henry Moore articles have been featured articles – the very best articles on Wikipedia).
The use of pictures in these articles is limited to:
Pictures of the artist alone or with others.
Pictures of the artists work.
Pictures of buildings/locations of note to the artist.
As for the word/picture ratio, this would apply only to pictures that already meet the above requirements.
The pictures I have deleted do not meet these standards.
Memphisto (
talk) 13:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Chancing across this article again, I've cut the following images as misleading:-
I've also clarified in the caption that the Windmill Theatre photo is not a contemporary one. -- McGeddon ( talk) 17:13, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
It is difficult to criticise something that so much work has gone into but I'll put this out there in the hope that it will ultimately result in better coverage of this subject. Currently this page and the others associated with it ( The art of Stella Vine, Talks and collaborations by Stella Vine, Charitable work by Stella Vine, Charles Thomson, Stella Vine, and the Stuckists, and Rosy Wilde) look a little bit like some kind of Stella Vine Internet Scrapbook rather than encyclopedia entries. They abound in trivia (she liked the TV series Bagpuss, she used to listen to PJ Harvey, plans for Christmas, etc), anecdotal information, surplus background material and long passages in need of summarising. These pages do a real disservice to an interesting contemporary painter and anyone wanting to research her. Maybe a consensus can be established that the content of the numerous Stella Vine pages be merged back to one critically edited, well-rounded and coherent page and that this should be illustrated with examples of her work and not photographs of people that she happens to have painted pictures of, people that she has been compared to or places that she lived near to. I hope that this comment will be taken in the spirit of constructive criticism in which it is intended. -- Nofoto ( talk) 08:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I came here accidentally but can't believe the amount of detailed material in this article about - let's be honest - a very minor/peripheral artist. A brief outline of her life and career highlights would suffice. I'm not sure that we need quite so many photographs of places where she apparently once lived. And photographs of subjects that she once painted. Ok, if that important, show the paintings but why the need for, say, a photo of Drogba? This is a self-written entry isn't it? No-one other than the subject could possibly have such a forensic interest in her life. Doesn't do Wikipedia any favours.... Twizzlemas ( talk) 20:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Charitable work by Stella Vine was recently deleted and merged with this article. The art of Stella Vine has been tagged as another possible merge since February 2012, with no discussion - I've changed the templates to point to this discussion here, and proposed the same merge for Talks and collaborations by Stella Vine. All three articles have an uneven amount of overlap and would be better combined into a single, clear article. "Talks and collaborations" seems particularly thin, as it appears to be including every possible press interview Vine has given. ("In the same month, Vine told The Guardian that she would spend Christmas Day 2008 with a run around the Serpentine, or a walk in Hyde Park or across London town with her son's bullmastiff dog and a small haversack of whisky and coffee.") I've put a fourth article, Charles Thomson, Stella Vine, and the Stuckists up for deletion, suggesting it be merged with Vine and Thomson's articles. -- McGeddon ( talk) 08:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
In the absence of any disagreement, I've gone ahead and started by merging The art of Stella Vine into this article, as well as trimming some of the trivia and less-significant-seeming quotes from critics and Vine herself. -- McGeddon ( talk) 10:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Template:Stella Vine has been nominated for deletion. Sionk ( talk) 12:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I meant to put a link back to the AfD where I mentioned it, but added the template with a widget and forgot to.
User:Madeofstars spent about a year writing this and other Stella Vine articles, and crowbarring mentions of Vine into tenuously-connected pages - this talk page list from 2009 shows that Madeofstars has shown a strong emotional bias towards Vine and against her detractors, the user briefly self-identified as "a big fan" of Vine, and from other user-talk threads seems to have been personally present at several of Vine's shows, and has been acting as an email go-between to get Wikipedia's permission to use images. Assuming good faith and concluding this is just a Vine superfan who's taken amateur video footage of her shows and wants to fight Vine's corner at Wikipedia, it is potentially close to a "personal connection to a topic or person" and "people with whom you could reasonably be said to have an antagonistic relationship in real life" WP:COS, and we should look at this whole article - and any which we merge into it - on that basis. -- McGeddon ( talk) 18:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Stella Vine. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:23, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Stella Vine. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:05, 2 December 2017 (UTC)