User talk:Boubi

Welcome!

Hello Boubi! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Goodnight mush^Talk 20:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

List of Notable Academicians for the Academy of Fine Arts Krakow

(You wrote)

Why are you limiting the information on this entry? Surely this entry would benefit from a list of Notable Graduates? Henryk Gotlib should surely be mentioned as few Polish artists made as great an impact in England. He was asked to join the London Group when they had no other non-British members and after his death was honoured with a major retrospective of his work at the Scottish National Gallery of Modern Art in 1970. I don't understand why you would EVER remove valid (and truthful) information from an entry. I just wanted to make it more thorough, include more information and make it a more detailed entry on the Academy, why do you want to keep it basic and short? If the list of celebrated graduates is indeed, as you're so quick to point out, in the hundreds, why not list them all! They deserve it. Furthermore, look at entries for other Academies of art and you'll find lengthy list of notable studens. Please stop removing useful and true information. You're not making it better, you're making it worse. --Mahboubian 16:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, do not get upset. I understand perfectly well why you’d like to promote the article you wrote on Henryk Gotlib, however, if you’d like to make a meaningful contribution to the Academy of Fine Arts in Kraków please conduct more research in order to make it count. I fully support the addition of celebrated academicians to the article on Academy, just like you thought, but not only the names that are already featured there, which looks like a copout (with Gotlib as the only alternative). I suggest you start with the Wiki search [1] of any “graduate of the Academy of Fine Arts in Kraków” and also of the “graduate of Kraków (Cracow) School of Fine Arts.” Read more about Young Poland Movement and Polish culture in order to locate as many Kraków academicians as you can. If you can make a list of at least a dozen names of painters with artistic merit and country-wide recognition, than the link to Gotlib will be most certainly justified.

P.S. Please remember to include in your research List_of_Poles#Fine_arts. Thanks. --Poeticbent talk 18:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to assure you that I'm not "upset" by this (merely disappointed by your somewhat rude removal of my valid contribution), nor was my intention to, as you put it, "promote" my article on Henryk Gotlib. I am a historian of art at the University of Bristol, UK, and I did not write about Gotlib for personal reasons. I have researched Gotlib extensively and I feel he deserves more recognition. I just wanted to add some interesting information and I felt Henryk Gotlib has a rightful place in that entry. He studied at the Academy from 1908-1910 and taught there as a professor from 1949-1950. Indeed, any other successful graduate has, in my view, a rightful place in that entry and if someone wants to contribute to that page you should refrain from deleting their contributions. It seems you are the type of editor who only appreciates his own contributions and I think that it's outrageous to deny readers any extra information that editors like myself wish to add. Isn't the nature of Wikipedia to share knowledge by expanding and adding to existing articles? All best wishes. --Mahboubian 01:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK than. Put it back in if you’re so disappointed in my approach. I will look for the names of prominent academicians to add to your list later. I offered you an alternative (see above), but I sense you probably don’t know enough about Polish art to respond to my suggestion with the fury of relevant names. Maybe there’s something we can learn from each other after all. But please remember that to add just one artist who’s hardly recognized in Poland ahead of scores of national heroes could upset a lot of graduates of that academy, myself included. --Poeticbent talk 01:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I do not wish to cause a fuss and you're right, my knowledge of Polish art is not all that extensive so I better leave it to you. However, I know enough to know that Henryk Gotlib is certainly not, as you aver, "hardly recognized in Poland". Your National Museum in Warsaw held a major retrospective of his work - a one-man show - in 1980. Futhermore, in London, where I live, his work can be found in major national museums like the Tate. He was a great artist (he was also very patriotic and published a book entitled Polish Painting, I have it, which promoted his fellow Polish artists) and Poland should be proud of him. I cannot understand why you would write that he is "hardly recognized"; I am no great expert but that comment makes me question whether your knowledge on the subject is limited too. --Mahboubian 11:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are right about the fact that just because I haven’t heard of Gotlib before, he isn’t famous where you live. I created a short list of famous graduates of the Academy and after hearing your discourse, I added Gotlib to it. I hope that makes you happy. --Poeticbent talk 13:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please remain civil

Your comments here (and even the modified version to which you changed it here) regarding my adding Kevin Wasden as someone influenced by Klimt and Degas was completely uncalled for, unnecessary, and a violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. You are welcome to politely disagree with other editors, but ridiculing good faith edits (and calling editors "ridiculous") is unacceptable on Wikipedia. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. Thank you for your cooperation. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you would refrain from fear mongering in order to lead people into believing that expressing their private opinions is a crime. I did not edit any article you wrote, nor did I publicly criticise anything. I am, however, entitled to my opinion and as a scholar of art history I believe your linking of the great masters Klimt and Degas to Kevin Wasden is, frankly, ridiculous. I apologise for initially calling you ridiculous (I must have simply been upset for Klimt and Degas and your reduction of their art to popular fantasy/science fiction artwork. To my credit I did realise my mistake right away and edited that out) but I stand by my words - linking an artist like Kevin Wasden to a great master like Degas is ridiculous. Please do not take that personally (although the fact that you have suggests that you added Kevin Wasden into the Klimt/Degas pages for some sort of self-promotional or personal reason).

If you indeed, as you claim, made the edit in "good faith" (presumably you are not an expert on the subject and are therefore open-minded) then it is not a huge affair and I'd urge you not to blow this out of proportion, simply allow me to correct you: Kevin Wasden is not an artist of any great consequence or relevance to the history of art, or indeed to the mainstream of contemporary art. Therefore his inclusion on the pages of Klimt/Degas is not helpful to the general public, nor is it legitimate. Wikipedia is about adding useful links to other pages for the general public to read. A legitimate influence for Degas would be the post-Impressionists, e.g. van Gogh, who developed the techniques of the Impressionists. Not Wasden.

I find myself inspired by the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi and amongst others the Dalai Lama - I am not about to include my name in their entries on Wikipedia. Please don't take this personally; we all make mistakes, we are all just humble students. If your edit was in good faith that is appreciated, nevertheless it is the duty of editors like myself who happen to have more knowledge on this particular subject (art history) to correct you. --Mahboubian 11:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you aren't meaning to be an art snob, I apologize, but your entire comment is extremely arrogant and rude. I never claimed that Kevin Wasden was on the same level as Klimt and Degas (though from what I've seen of Klimt's work, I'd certainly call his work more skillful and much more pleasing to the eye). All I did was add Wasden as an artist influenced by them. There is no requirement anywhere that says that an artist influenced by another has to be at least as good as the artist who influenced them. And it's arrogance to claim that science fiction and fantasy art is somehow beneath them—it's just plain absurd. There are many science fiction and fantasy artists that are much more skillful than Klimt, IMHO. I'm sure you'll disagree, though, based on your comment above.

Be that as it may, the main point of my comment to you was that calling me ridiculous (even with editing your comment to call my good faith edit ridiculous) is a violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. All I'm asking is that you not treat like insignificant bugs other editors who may disagree with you. If you can't remain civil in your actions here, and if you can't assume good faith on the part of other editors, you will not be able to work very well here. You can disagree with me all you want, but please keep it polite. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dewhurst

Dear Mahboubian,

Thank you. Your note to me was impressive for your knowledge on the subject. Initially I was dubious; I found little about Dewhurst via a google search (no other bios of much substance), believed your additions were a bit too prominent for the articles on Impressionism and Monet, and I was not taken by the quality of his work. However, and not for the first time, I have encountered a subject about which I have much to learn, and you are obviously a good and patient teacher.

I appreciate the time and effort you took to write me, and the depth of your scholarship here. I do want to read more about Dewhurst and his writing, and will look up McConkey. In the meantime, I stand corrected. Respectfully yours, JNW 03:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(My thanks to Nihonjoe for moving this to the correct page; I am reading and writing too late at night). JNW 03:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

The kind sentiment is mutual. I think that my efforts are better spent contributing to existing articles--I would like to add much of substance to Winslow Homer, Corot, and Daumier, for starters, none of which would require undue research, just some time and patience--than in reverting. There are already great editors for that. For your part, you have added content on someone whom I did not know, and who seems to have, indeed, played an interesting and important role in art history. I was initially too quick to discount your contributions. It is possible that I have learned several things. Very best regards, JNW 19:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have read more about this, and posted some thoughts on my talk page. JNW 18:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Henryk_Gotlib_Self.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Henryk_Gotlib_Self.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 11:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Henryk Gotlib Eve.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Henryk Gotlib Eve.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eve Henryk Gotlib.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Eve Henryk Gotlib.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Victor Darjou Nasir Eddin Shah.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Victor Darjou Nasir Eddin Shah.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Victor Darjou Nasir Eddin Shah.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Hi Mahboubian!
We thank you for uploading Image:Victor Darjou Nasir Eddin Shah.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 20:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:0399 Alivandi.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:0399 Alivandi.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.