Talk:Robert Grossman (artist)

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Animation: People Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Animation people work group.

Untitled[edit]

Hello. How may I improve "Robert Grossman" entry, specifically?

I always planned to lengthen and strengthen this entry anyway, as it is far too meager in relation to its subject.

Please note inclusion of Grossman's iconic Firesign Theater image.

THIS GUY IS A BIG DEAL IN AMERICAN ILLUSTRATION. Prolific as hell, and very high-profile. Every American has seen his art, whether they know it or not. Which is the crux of my response to your request to prove that this guy is significant: "He is, though few know his name. Yet."

I marked it for cleanup and notability concerns, not deletion. It will be reviewed by other editors. Danny Lilithborne 04:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This article badly needs sourcing. It's easy to say somebody's great. If he's so great, there's other people saying it that you can link to. NickelShoe (Talk) 05:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMEN, NickelShoe.[edit]

It can be done. It shall be done. Please be patient. This is my first-ever Wikipedia entry.

It'll go more smoothly next time, with help from guys like you.

I mean to do this RIGHT! Thanks.

Relgif 06:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Specific concerns may be found on the talk page."[edit]

So goes the maintenance tag. To whom it may concern: Please indicate specific problem(s), and I will endeavor to fix them. I believe affixing such a tag to an article obliges a passing specific or two; otherwise, it is not all that helpful.

Relgif 08:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my bad. In response to the query you left on my talk page, some specific (but by no means the only) examples which I found problematic are:

"However, a significantly smaller group of people know the name and person behind the images. The fame and fortune of artists are notoriously mercurial; Grossman's personal profile is demonstrably due a raise."
"Ceaselessly toiling in the field of illustration since the 1960s, Grossman has amassed an impressive, enormous body of work..."
"At a separate website, which may be accessed through his main site, T-shirts bearing Grossman's designs are available."

The first and third of those should probably be removed altogether - it isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to raise Grossman's profile, nor to sell his t-shirts. The second could be made more neutral by changing it to:

"Having worked in the field of illustration since the 1960s, Grossman has amassed an sizeable body of work..."

Also, several sections of the article ("Painter", "Sculptor", "These days") don't cite any sources, so things like:

"surveying four decades of Grossman creations, one finds that "the awkward, early work" and the "tired, later work" simply don't exist."

have a tendancy to read like your own personal opinions. The article as a whole seems to paint a rosy picture of Grossman, but I don't see much in the way of critical assessment of his work. I would say in general that you need to be wary of WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:V. Personally, I always find it useful to look at several featured articles to get an idea of the kind of standards I should be aiming for.

That's just my opinion, of course. :) It might be an idea for you to list the article at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback to get a few comments from other users. PC78 16:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PC78 -

Your critiques are sound. In fact, I have no objection to your skimming the effusiveness off the text as it stands as of this morning. If that significantly shortens it, so be it. Your work will serve as an example to me, not only at this page, but on any future pages. Relgif 18:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PC78 - I believe I have addressed a number of your concerns by removing material that betrayed obvious partiality. This was mainly a subtractive process; I have located several good sources I intend to use to make the piece more informative, specific, and less "editorial". Thank you.Relgif 03:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks better - I've removed the cleanup tag since you've addressed my concerns about the article. Keep up the good work! PC78 14:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help, PC78. I think you've helped make the entry stronger. Relgif 03:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Airplane art 1.jpg[edit]

Image:Airplane art 1.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 02:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Grossman.JPG[edit]

Image:Grossman.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 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Robert Grossman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110709014736/http://designobserver.com/archives/022774.html to http://www.designobserver.com/archives/022774.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]