Talk:Mona Lisa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mona Lisa article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2
Good article Mona Lisa was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Contents

[edit] Add links

In the Aesthetics section, the mention of "Portrait of Baldassare Castiglione" should link to the corresponding wikipedia article, especially since the referencing sentence makes a stylistic comparison to the painting, which may be unfamiliar to the reader. I'd change it myself but can't due to the semi-protection. Macroexp (talk) 01:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Now linked to article on Castiglione, with painting by Raphael. JNW (talk) 02:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reaching GA

Hi. Thanks to this article, Lisa del Giocondo reached GA and is a featured article candidate at the moment. I can't push this article to GA but can make some edits in that direction. Anyone else interested? -Susanlesch (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] merge to where?

Re this edit which removed some material with "merge" in the edit summary: if this material was merged to another article, where is the other article? I think the information about tours is interesting and should be kept somewhere, even if it has to be moved to a subpage. --Coppertwig (talk) 13:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research

"Mona Lisa was not well-known until the mid-19th century…"

"For modern viewers the missing eyebrows add to the slightly semi-abstract quality of the face…."

Would be interested in seeing citations for these and several other claims in the article.

SchrageMusik (talk) 05:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Infrared Scan: usage of "apanage"

I am confused by the usage of "apanage" in this section. The context seems appropriate for "coiffure" or (less pretentiously) "hairstyle", but it is possible that another meaning was intended. Maybe I'm just missing something, so I won't be bold just yet. Thoughts?Scray (talk) 16:29, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Feminized self-portrait

I see no reference to the work by Dr. Lillian F. Schwartz of Bell Labs, who speculated (ca. 1990) that the Mona Lisa was simply a feminized version of Leonardo's own self-portrait. Using digital photo manipulation, she discovered that both Da Vinci and the Mona Lisa's facial characteristics are perfectly aligned, but left-right reversed. See Lillian's website Lillian.com, and a brief mention here. There is also a video speculating about the actual appearance of da Vince himself at Ted.com. My own version of the comparison image (constructed from the Wikipedia images) can be found here. — Loadmaster (talk) 17:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops, never mind. Found it at Speculation about Mona Lisa. — Loadmaster (talk) 17:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bad English

The following is not a sentence and does not make sense: "In Italian, ma donna from donna meaning my lady which became Madonna, and its contraction mona" I suugest: "The word mona is a contration of madonna, or ma donna, meaning 'my lady'" The article seems to be locked for editing, though, so I can't sort it out - can one of you experienced Wikipedians do it for me? HairyDan (talk) 22:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I've tried to address this problem. JoJan (talk) 13:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mona Lisa

Mona Lisa was supposed to be Leonardo Da Vinci himself —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.80.8.89 (talk) 01:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A new reference from a study directed by Louvre/C2RMF

A book has recently been edited, following an advanced scientific examination of the work, during its move to "Salle des Actes". It has been edited by members of C2RMF ("Centre de Recherche et de Restauration des Musees de France", http://www.c2rmf.fr). Maybe it could be of interest to add it to the references, since an english translation is available. To check the trhuthfulness, see for instance http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mona-Lisa-Inside-Painting/dp/0810943158/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1212856843&sr=1-1

Reference:

J.-P. Mohen, M. Menu and B. Mottin (eds), "Mona Lisa, inside the painting", Abrams, New-York, 2006, ISBN 10:0-8109-4315-8.

BiBTeX code if needed:

@BOOK{Mohen2006,

 title = {Mona {L}isa, inside the painting},
 publisher = {Abrams},
 year = {2006},
 editor = {J.-P. Mohen and M. Menu and B. Mottin},
 address = {New York},
 note = {ISBN 10:0-8109-4315-8},

}

D. Dureisseix, LMGC, Univ. Montpellier 2, France —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dureisseix (talk • contribs) 16:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)