Talk:Jean Bellette

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleJean Bellette is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 25, 2017.
Did You KnowOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 23, 2014Good article nomineeListed
July 16, 2014Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 7, 2014.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Jean Bellette is the only woman to have won the Sulman Prize more than once?
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 16, 2017, and March 16, 2024.
Current status: Featured article

Only woman to win Sulman Prize twice[edit]

Per WP:CALC, I have cited this fact to the list of Sulman Prize winners, as one has merely to read the list to see that no other woman has won it twice. If anyone has a concern with this, please raise it. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible sources[edit]

There is no mention of Bellette in Ambrus's The Ladies' Picture Show. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:48, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Horrible FA mistake[edit]

The lede now says: "...in Sydney, where her teachers included Thea Proctor." While grammatically ok, this can mean two things: One of the teachers was TP, or TP was part of the curriculum. So should not be in an FA article this way. -DePiep (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is neither horrible nor a mistake. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It has a double reading. -DePiep (talk) 19:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not any more. -DePiep (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't have a double meaning, at least not in English, unless you're really trying hard. It's common language. But it's good you've fixed it if you think it's addressed your own issue. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jean Bellette. 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) 11:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not bad[edit]

Decent article but needs more pictures IMO. CTDU (talk) 04:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have to agree here – for an FA it's already too few, and for an FA visual artist the issue is distractingly obvious. Aza24 (talk) 19:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is a problem, but certainly at the time I took it through FA, the image rules on WP and copyright generally prevented any other images being included, among those i was able to locate. Happy if anyone finds other options. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, backtrack. The non-free use rationales were strict, but more images could possibly be used. i didn't find an image of the hill end house online that met WP's free use criteria, though. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hamiltonstone: Thoughts on any of these? Worst comes to worse we could put some in as external images. Aza24 (talk) 21:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, have added one under NF use. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:09, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hamiltonstone: Looks good... Is perhaps one more to much to ask? ;-) (maybe in the legacy section?) Aza24 (talk) 20:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think that another photo, perhaps an image of her or a picture of her work in the legacy section, would be a nice addition. Gustudent (talk) 13:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]