Talk:The Mystical Nativity

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Christmas Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Christmas task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Untitled[edit]

i have absolutely no clue how to add the image of the painting, so if someone else could do it (or show me how that would be nice).

i added the file to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mystical_nativity.jpg#filelinks

Reverts[edit]

I rolled back a large copyvio, from here, plus fiddling with the project ratings, and a comment Johnbod (talk) 22:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

comment was: So? Such short and unworthy words for one of the most famous paintings in history?! Everyone knows the Mystic Nativity is one of the most famous works of Botticelli, why then write about it in the form of a stub?! Stubs are designed for unfamous things, but the Mystic Nativity don't deserved to have an article about it like this! Please make more improvements on this article or I'll improve it. A deal. 149.254.219.71

Some editors seem not to like too much explication/discussion of paintings - probably gets in the way of their aesthetic apreciation - why spoil the image with tedious talk of politics or theology , however pertinent to the art, and they stamp on any such tediousness Sayerslle (talk) 23:55, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be pathetic. See WP:COPYVIO. Johnbod (talk) 00:24, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean that particular edit, but was making a more general point - maybe I'm wrong. I'd like to expand this with material from the BBC 'Private Life of a Christmas Masterpiece' but hesitated because I feel editors like you tend to think its too much weight on a single book, or single programme. I see that point but also feel that one doesn't get balance straight away - bend the stick, then it gets bent back and theres balance - I don't like the balance of absence. It still grates that empty pages on Bosch's paintings are thought preferable to unbalanced ones with a warning template that they are heavily dependent on a single source. Anyway , this article seems to have been pretty inaccurate and it still seems very cagey about the influence of savonarola, but his subject matter did change a lot didn't it? I've only watched the one programme on botticelli, so I know I know next to nothing but even that one programme made a strong case for the influence of savonarola on this painting being very significant. the words on the angels ribbons , about the privileges of Mary, have been shown to be taken word for word from a sermon given on Assumption day by savonarola. Even that it was on canvas - maybe because of its dangerous message, so it could be rolled up and hidden - thats stated in the programme.Anyway I'm glad I discovered it because the top third especially is very beautiful don't you think? Sayerslle (talk) 00:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any editors acting as you suggest, though it may be justified in some cases. I've no idea why you talk about "editors like you". A lot of copyvios have been removed recently, hardly any by me; the text was put there in good faith by an editor who had "permission" from the www.wga.hu site, without realizing that they just copy stuff from art history books. AFAIK the Bosch articles were mostly always very short, just picture captions. If you want to add material, go ahead. Johnbod (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article name / Image[edit]

Why does this article name need a disambiguator "(Botticelli)"? There is no other "Mystical Nativity", so I suggest to move it to The Mystical Nativity.

I also suggest to replace the image from the English Wikipedia, File:Mystical nativity.jpg, which is currently used in the article, with an image from Commons, File:The Mystical Nativity.jpg; although there is some distortion in that image, particularly along the left edge, its reproduction of colour and details seems superior to me. There is a Commons:Category:Mystic Nativity (Botticelli) which lists three other reproductions. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see the title has been moved - I'm not sure this was wise as, for example, this famous Filippo Lippi in Berlin

is sometimes called the "Mystic Nativity", which is probably the best title for it. Oddly it also has a programme in the "Private Lives..." series. Johnbod (talk) 10:56, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the Lippi picture gets an article, it could be named Mystic Nativity with hatnotes on both articles pointing to the other. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I taped the programme and I would like to use the programme to start an article on the painting, and in Radio Times the painting is called The Adoration of the Christ Child. The article title could be The Adoration of the Christ Child (Filippo Lippi), no? Sayerslle (talk) 14:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My 1998 Gemaldegalerie guide calls it the "Adoration in the Forest", though an older catalogue calls it a third, much longer name - "The Virgin Adoring the Child, with Saints John the Baptist and Bernardino of Siena" in German. Anything like The Adoration of the Christ Child would need lots of disam, as there are thousands of paintings of this subject - the "Adoration of Christ" is the usual term - & probably a few others by Lippi, like this for example or this. It should probably be Adoration of Christ (Lippi, Berlin), the straightforward way, since none of the other names seem predominant. Or Adoration in the Forest (Lippi) [1] - I would still disam as the title is so variable. Several redirects should be set up. Johnbod (talk) 16:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adoration of the Christ Child (Lippi) - or, the last one you wrote, Adoration in the Forest (Lippi), surely either of those titles would be clear enough - the programme said the setting in a dark wooded forest was unusual. I think Adoration in the Forest (Lippi) would be best. Sayerslle (talk) 17:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably. That seems to be what the owning museum still uses, which is one factor in support, & has strong ghits. There will be current redlinks incoming. Johnbod (talk) 17:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have started the Lippi painting article - botticelli was his pupil and seeing the paintings together above it looks like Lippi s Mary was used by Botticelli here, - the question of plagiarism has been raised, on a wikiquette alert page not the article discussion page, , I have used the TV programmes to add material to the Botticelli article, and to satrt the Lippi article - my idea is that as i go over the Lippi article i will use synonyms here and there, make it less a direct transcription, and maybe get other books on Lippi, Jeffrey Ruda's for eg and weave in info from there - but basically it is a 'steal' of info and quotes from the TV programme. Is that a plagiarism problem, I should appreciate advice from an admin if the article needs radical pruning to avoid charges of plagiarism. the ads do say 'its your BBC', - so it is our info! Sayerslle (talk) 16:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

which words ?[edit]

under "historical context" is a hint regarding "the apocalyptic and troubling words", but they are not mentioned. Hskoppek (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Para 2 of the article. Johnbod (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]