User talk:Ham II/Archive 2005

Oath of the Horatii

Thanks for finding the source. I suspected the claims were a hoax, but every now and then some odd claim made by an anonymous editor turns out to be correct, like in this case. I am glad to hear that you will clean up this article. Thanks. Rl 19:47, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Art portal features

I'm so glad to see your input, Ham! Presently, there is no process to changing Art portal features. Please change the portal page whenever you want to. It could use some attention from someone besides myself. If lots of people were involved with the portal, a process would probably evolve. The project Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts is related to the portal, but the project is moving slowly. --sparkit (talk) 14:11, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Ham, the features you've added are marvelous! Thanks. --sparkit (talk) 19:27, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Re: British Museum

I have no particular side in the argument, nor do I wish to impose a POV on that section, I merely found it wordy:

"the expertise and desire to preserve the items are now more widespread"

"The debate over the legitimacy of the British Museum's claims over many of its artifacts continues, with the Museum claiming an inalienable right to hold them under British law, and critics accusing it of theft and inconsiderateness"

Any sentence that has to use "inconsiderateness" can be cleaned up. Is there any way it can be cleaned up and retain the NPOV? It just is awkward and wordy.

--Robojames 20:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I made an effort to maintain your content, but more clearer:

• "Some critics have accepted this, although many argue that the artifacts would be well protected in their home countries, as there is sufficient expertise and desire to preserve them."
• "While the British Museum continues to claim it has an inalienable right to the disputed artifacts under British law; critics continue to accuse the British Museum of theft and cultural appropriation."

Let me know if it's ok. --Robojames 20:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Uploading from Commons

May I ask why you uploaded that image from the Commons? If it is on there already, it doesn't need to be uploaded to the local wiki to work. Cheers, smoddy 20:32, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Which one? – Ham 20:35, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Leonardo's 'surname'

Sparkit, why have you changed all references to Leonardo to 'da Vinci' in the newly-renamed Annunciation (da Vinci)? Considering that the last part of his name just means 'from Vinci' (rather than being a surname in the modern sense), it seems to me to be as awkward as an article on Henry VIII which repeatedly calls his first wife 'of Aragon'. Only a minor quibble; please carry on with the good work you're doing for art-based articles. — Ham 09:54, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

"Leonardo" sounds odd to me, however consistency in terminolgy throughout articles is more important to me and I see that wikipedia style for him seems to be using "Leonardo". So, I've changed that article back to "Leonardo". >>sparkit|TALK<< 16:34, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Re:Leornardo paintings

I created Category:Leonardo da Vinci paintings mainly because Category:Paintings was getting too large and needed to be broken up. For this purpose a separate paintings category is needed. Thus I think a better solution is to leave his drawings, architectural works, sculptures, and cartoons in Category:Leonardo da Vinci. I didn't read The Virgin and Child with St. Anne and St. John the Baptist, and forgot that it wasn't a painting. I have thus moved it out of paintings and back to Category:Leonardo da Vinci. Good work on that article, by the way, we have a real shortage of people with expertise in fine art. - SimonP 18:19, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

On Image:Giorgione Tempest.jpg

I read the comment that you made on the image, I personally thought the Commons version Image:Giorgione 019.jpg was better, because it is of a higher resolution and also because it picks out the details in the picture better. For example, look at the boy on the left. But it seems that my interpretation of the "duplicate" CSD criteria was incorrect, so I'll probably list the ones which aren't speedily deleted in a block on ifd. - Hahnchen 20:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

It was speedied, but if you think it should still be in wikipedia, I have a local copy. I can re-upload it if you want. - Hahnchen 15:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:WP NGL temptest3.gif has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:WP NGL temptest3.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Admrboltz (T | C) 23:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for experimenting with the page Image:WP NGL temptest3.gif on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Admrboltz (T | C) 23:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)