Talk:Roy Lichtenstein

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified Roy Lichtenstein as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the German language Wikipedia.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? Class: This article has not been assigned a class according to the assessment scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Vandalism

Just read the article, nastily vandalised

Where? Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 13:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


At the bottom of the Early Years Section: (quote)"everybody say he stinks!!1

all he cares is about himself.

joy libchicken is such a wimp he stinks like poo and we all hate it because he stinks every where he goes. he sayed that he doesn't even know how to say CHICKEN!. well; he is a CHICKEN!"

This is the part! I think it must be in HTML or some other code not visible from the edit text page (it doesn't show up there..)

Your efforts to combat this are GREATLY appreciated! However, it would seem you were viewing a version of the page cached on your local computer. The vandalism in question was removed by User:ACBest earlier today, see this link. If you are using Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox, you might want to try "Ctrl+F5" or "Ctrl+R" if something like this happens again. If you are using a Mac, the appropriate command would be "Commad+R". Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 20:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV quote

If "Such criticism, others counter, misses the point that Lichtenstein himself aimed for flat artificiality." is going to be in the article in needs to be changed to "Such criticism, Gamaliel counters, misses the point that Lichtenstein himself aimed for flat artificiality." Since that is really what is being said--198.93.113.49 15:59, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Expand tag justification: Article does not sufficiently describe the life and work of Lichtenstein. Good enough? Gamaliel 16:16, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What actually needs to be added? How much information can you expect to find about Roy Luchtenstein in an encyclopedia?--198.93.113.49 16:20, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Do you really think this is sufficient for an artist as famous as Lictenstein? Gamaliel 16:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It's fine. If someone has something to add they should add it, but I don't see why it needs an expand tag. What do you think it lacks?--198.93.113.49 16:31, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The article is fine for a start, yes, but I don't see how you could object to expanding this article. If I had something specific to add, I would add it, as I will once I do some research. This article is simply far too thin and lacking in substance and information. Gamaliel 16:36, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have no objection to expanding the article. I have no objection to explanding any article in Wikipedia. Does that mean every article in Wikipedia should have an expand tag?--198.93.113.49 16:42, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This one should because it is short and inadequate given Lichtenstein's fame and importance. I've listed it on the expansion page. Gamaliel 16:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Good, there isn't much point in tagging it if it isn't on the expansion page.--198.93.113.49 17:20, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I do not think that it is incorrect that Lichtenstein abandonded comic panels in the 60's. Go to http://www.lichtensteinfoundation.org/frames.htm click on the Lichtenein search engine and go to 1989 for examples.--198.93.113.49 17:20, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough, though this isn't the same type of work as the early 60s and this doesn't mean he didn't stop doing the latter in 1965. These 1989 pieces aren't the slavish copies being discussed in the rest of the paragraph, so I think it's fair to say he abandoned the near exact copying in 1965. Gamaliel 17:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
True, it is noticablly different. Why don't you quote what Time says about him leaving this type of work and then we can add a quailifier about him doing a different style of comics based artwork later.--198.93.113.49 17:30, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Lichtenstein has been typecast as "the comic-strip artist," but in fact comic strips take up only an early phase of his work. By 1965 he had stopped basing images on them. He was never to refer to comics again, except now and then by including a parody of one of his own earlier paintings in a parody of an elegant interior -- ah, well, I'm a classic too now, feels funny but that's art- life."

I don't really see the need to insert a quote just to say that he stopped in 1965. I've tweaked the working a bit, hopefully that will be satisfactory. Gamaliel 17:36, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your tweaking helps. I moved the statement though because it interrupted a thought.--198.93.113.49 17:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
On second thought I think that the quote is worth while anyway. You want to expand. Let's expand.--198.93.113.49 19:21, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Notice to remove quote

Lichtenstein's obituary in The Economist noted that "this is to miss the point of Roy Lichtenstein's achievement. His was the idea. The art of today, he told an interviewer, is all around us."

It's imposible to tell what the "this" in the quote is refering to. The quote is meaningless without the context since we do on know what point is suposedly being missed. Please include the rest of the quote. Otherwise, I will have to delete it.--198.93.113.49 17:30, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Mere workers at the coal-face, the artists who laboured away on the comic books that Mr Lichtenstein copied, did not think much of his paintings. In enlarging them, some claimed, they became static. Some threatened to sue him. Whatever the justice of their complaints, in fact Mr Lichtenstein did them a sort of favour. Comic books these days are often taken seriously, the subject of theses (or a sign of growing illiteracy). But this is to miss the point of Roy Lichtenstein's achievement. His was the idea. The art of today, he told an interviewer, is all around us. It is not Impressionist painting. "It's really McDonald's." Of course, you don't have to believe everything he said." Gamaliel 17:36, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's a long quote, but I don't think I see anyway to trim it. I going to add the whole thing as a block quote.--198.93.113.49 17:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Made some additions and move a few things about.

Hope no-one minds, added a bunch of information, still learning the wiki editor so the "notable works" needs to be put in a table as soon as I figure out how. I have a few ideas for more information to add which I'll hopefully do in the coming weeks. --John-Nash 15:24, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] more...

Added table (thanks to dreamweaver :) ) and removed list, still looks a bit clunky though --John-Nash 15:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Added a few links and removed an fairly odd exisitng one, included citations for quotes from publications with linls to the articles.

Added links to galleries, which link to the actual pictures at the relevant museums website.

I wonder how/if we can add a picture of the artist from somewhere?

[edit] More changes

Standarised some of the conventions and located the current location of the paintings mentioned in the text. Few other changes, I removed the link to the comparison site as it appears consistently down. --John-Nash 20:55, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Full quote

The quote that User:Gamaliel insist on providing only a fragment of makes no sense without the context. The quote begins with a pronounm "this" for goodness sakes. You can't expect anyone to know what "this" refers to without the context. Gamaliel has a personal vendetta against me and is simply reverting my edit out of spite. There is no reason not to include the full quote. It is an excelent quote that has a lot of valuable things to say about Lichtenstein. On the other hand the fragment adds nothing to the article at all since a reader cannot possublly undrstand it without the context.

A personal vendetta? Don't flatter yourself. It's merely a difference of opinion about the necessity of including the full text of a rather long quote. Gamaliel 18:11, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] External links

Hello gentlemen! It's been a while since anyone but me used this talk page, it seems. Namely 11 months and three weeks, or so.

I would like to state my disappointment by the massive amount of external links available in this article, namely the ones linking to his works. It feels out of place in an encyclopedia. As thus, if noone objects, I'll make some more "normal" lists of his works and will instead link to the galleries containing the pictures in the external links - there aren't too many of them - in the External links section.

Objections, anyone? Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 19:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Apparently I did not wait for objections, and adhered to the policy of being bold instead. First, I removed all the external links to his works and put them as a list under the header "selected works" - here is a diff. Then, I decided that that list was WAY too long, and removed them all. Someone who feels s/he can do it should re-add a smaller selection of works under that header. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Galleries

I have changed the links from Tate Gallery to Tate Modern, as this is where Lichtenstein's works are on display in London. I know it's technically the gallery, but it doesn't hurt to be a bit more specific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.79.169 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Carded

Can anybody say who put a US$2.5million Lichtenstein purchase on his credit card? Trekphiler 18:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] citations

What are considered reasonable citations? I think I have some websites that can be used. I have seen the External Links page, but what about citations? El redactor

The same citations you'd use for a master's thesis: Primary sources, such as text of Lichtenstein speeches; journalistic articles from reputable newspapers and magazines; transcripts of Lichtenstein interviews; published biographies; and for opinions of his work, reviews by established art critics. Hope this helps. --Tenebrae 13:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks much, can i read up on this more somewhere? El redactor

Absolutely! Start with Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources.
Also: If you end your post with a four of the tilde symbol, like this -- ~~~~ -- it will automatically sign and time-stamp your post. Happy Wiki'ing! --Tenebrae 15:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First One Man Show

In Early Years: In 1951 he had his first one-man exhibition at a gallery in New York. In Rise to Fame: ...and he had his first one man show at the gallery in 1962. Which is true? Little tinyfish 16:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a serious flaw. I'll do my best to look into it. Jobjörn (talk) 08:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Position of Citation

Shouldn't the citation number fall before the period, within the sentence? Little tinyfish 17:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

No. It should go like this: "This is a sentence.[1]" Why? I don't know, but see WP:MOS, there might be an explanation there. Jobjörn (talk) 08:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

27.10.1923-29.9.1997 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.185.233.9 (talk) 13:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)