Talk:Tacita Dean

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Controversy[edit]

just removed this from article. interesting but needs cites; the article is about living person and contains person information. unless it has citations personal info cannot be included.: Artlondon 23:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should be added that although the projects by Kozyra and Disinformation were made in the same locations as "Gellért" and "Sound Mirrors" they deal with them in very different ways from. Dean grew up on the Kent coast and was fascinated by the Sound Mirrors at Dungeness from an early age. Her film of the Gellért bathers was prompted by visits to the baths for arthritis treatments, at its core this is a work about healing - a recurring theme in Dean's practice.

I agree that the references to Dean's relationship with these other artists' work is over-stated in the article as it stands. I will re-write and fill out some of the text and include the issue of these 'controversies' in a footnote. If anyone could help with embedded links that would be great. Ed Krcma 19:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

that doesn't mean you can just blitz it under huge additions. Artlondon 20:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
considering the new expanded article, it would not be overstating it to maintain the previous controversy section. Artlondon 20:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

here is the section that was 'lost' under some recent huge additions. This - well sourced - material should be preserved after recent additions. Artlondon 20:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tacita Dean has been accused of producing very similar works to earlier pieces by other artists. For instance, in a letter to Art Monthly (October 1998) curator and art historian Anda Rottenberg noted similarities between Katarzyna Kozyra's film "Bath House" and Dean's later work "Gellert" (named after the Gellért Baths) - both works depict women chatting in a bath house in Budapest. Similarly "Blackout" (1997) by artist group Disinformation and Tacita Dean's "Sound Mirrors" (1999) both feature monolithic concrete sound mirrors found at various locations on the UK coast (and the correct chronology of these projects is documented in the essay "Listening for the Enemy" by Brian Dillon in Cabinet magazine 12 pp. 68-71 New York 2003). It should be added that although the projects by Kozyra and Disinformation were made in the same locations as "Gellért" and "Sound Mirrors" they deal with them in very different ways. Dean grew up on the Kent coast and was fascinated by the Sound Mirrors at Dungeness from an early age. Her film of the Gellért bathers was prompted by visits to the baths for arthritis treatments, at its core this is a work about healing - a recurring theme in Dean's practice.

Yes sorry - whoever is upset with this 'blitzing' - I'm not yet fully familiar with the editing system and am trying to add refs as I go and will continue over the next couple of days. Apologies for the slicing out - you're too quick for me in responding. Ed Krcma 21:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not upset: There are ways to edit, guidelines and policies. Your editing style isn't the wikipedia way. Unsourced material can't be pasted and just left. Also, all your additions are copy & pasted from another source; so are going to be undo. Signed 'whoever': >>>>>> Artlondon 21:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright[edit]

I hold the copyright for the website http://www.stammtischforum.org/synopsis_Dean. The text from that site comes from a talk that I gave and I am happy for it to be used on this Wikipedia site (I will send a message from the Stammtisch email to Wikimedia to this effect). Ed Krcma 21:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

in essence, you are required to "remove" copyright from the text and release it under GNU Free Documentation License. There are useful links from the copyrvio notice. Consider adding a CC etc notice to your website to avoid confusion. Artlondon 21:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
permission has been received -- but please -- this doesn't mean you can simply paste it in wholesale, over, and with no regard to the existing article. Your contributions are welcomed to expand this topic. You need to work with the existing info; it's been a group effort for two years. The article is to establish an overall neutral point of view; simply pasting over the bits you don't like is both lazy and establishes only your own point of you; which is not neutral. It's also not good to have an article written entirely by one person as this isn't neutral. You should also consider other people will edit your text. Expect this; anyone can edit wikipedia. You will not be able to simply undo edits just because they alter your text. Artlondon 00:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest adding a section at a time. Citing each section as you go. You need to cite the original sources; you can't simply cite your own web-page. Artlondon 00:54, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your advice - I hope that most of my changes have been to add material rather than paste over existing text. I do still feel that to have the 'controversy' as the first main section of the article is misleading. It is very rarely mentioned in any of the literature on the artist and so it doesn't seem entirely neutral to give it such prominence on the Wiki page. What do others think? Ed Krcma 08:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Currently 'controversy' precedes your pasted text. After your pasted text has been wikified and sourced the article can be reordered. I'm not sure all the pasted text is suitable here. This shouldn't be an essay about Dean. It is fairly obvious it was suggested to you this article may need editing; or you were indeed asked to edit this article - which is ok - and your contribution is welcomed, you clearly know this subject: but neutraltraility must be maintained. Can you take some time to view similar pages. Your initial objection was that the 'controversy' section may have been too long in regard to the whole article - indeed it may have been, but that is certainly no longer the case. The text in question has reliable verifiable sources, which is what counts, and why, for now, the text should be maintained. Artlondon 10:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notices[edit]

Please engage in community discussion before removing notices to maintain NPoV. Artlondon 18:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Notices[edit]

Would anybody object to me removing the copyright notice at the top of this discussion page? I own the copyright to the Stammtisch text mentioned, and I have given the appropriate permissions to Wikipedia. Also, given that there have been several edits to the article since the style and tone notices went up, should we consider removing them as well? The article includes citations and I feel its tone is now more appropriate to the Wikipedia context (although perhaps not all issues of quality have been resolved). What does anyone else think? Ed Krcma 19:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the notice on this page concerning copyright, gives permission for your text to be included in the article. As i've tried to explain already - remove this notice and it doesn't make this permission visible - which will cause problems in the future - like the deletion of your contributions for copyright infringement. The notices on the article are justified until issues resolved. The only edit was concerning the 'controsvtery' section - i moved it down the article. You can continue to edit the article in a way that the issues become resolved. Artlondon 15:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bold edit[edit]

just made huge deletion - BLP - rm controversy, rm essay and rm text pasted in weeks a month ago that remains neither wikified nor changed tonally - simply an essay available else where, link added to essay. also, tags removed from article, this page tidied. Artlondon 00:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

just to clarify - I'd left the edit for a few weeks a month to allow Ed to make the necessary changes but he pasted & disappeared. It was an essay and too cumbersome to wikify also needed total copyedit tonally. If he wishes to add such a large amount of text there needs to be proper discussion, about the best way for him to do this. Artlondon 00:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not true that there were no edits to this page. A number of citations and some internal links were added, as well as changes in tone. I must say that I find it hard to see how this blanket removal is constructive for anyone. Factually, the material was robust and it was considerably richer than the current page as it stands. If revisions were necessary, why not revise rather than dump? I don't understand this combative approach. It would be nice to hear some more voices on this issue. Ed Krcma 11:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Check the edits. one was undone by the editor, the other three where to 'Controversy'. All articles on living people must adhere these rules: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons. This page was left longer that it should have been. Ed, you have failed to answer concerns about a possible conflict of interest (Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest), and you really didn't engage in any discussion. As explained, the essay style (from where you simply pasted the whole of your existing article in), simply isn't suitable for WP. The sheer amount of copyeditting and rewriting was massive. Artlondon
There were some other edits on 2nd October (18.12) - removal of long quotation and other changes that I hoped would make the register of the writing more appropriate. Sorry, though, that I disappeared for a while and that I left the page not properly wikified with internal links. As far as your concerns about conflicts of interest, there are none - although I did once reviewed her work. I wrote about her as part of my thesis and this prompted me to want to expand the Wiki entry. Anyway, I'm sure we can build a more satisfying page once we find some time. Ed Krcma 20:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DeanTacitaTeignmouthElectron.jpg[edit]

Image:DeanTacitaTeignmouthElectron.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article 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.

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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. 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.

BetacommandBot 02:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tacita Dean. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Tacita Dean. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Tacita Dean. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tacita_Dean&oldid=1201406954"