Talk:Diego Velázquez

message: Changes since being promoted on April 16, 2005.  This is the version that was promoted.  Changes are minor but significant and seem to be positive. Tuf-Kat 04:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FAR|Featured article review]] of November 25, 2005

message: The section "Velázquez in modernity" appears to be a joke. But this is due to the disparity between the concept of a serious article regarding fine art and the images of works that were created by painters who obviously lacked Velázquez's ability.Lestrade 00:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jocundity

message: The link for Maria Theresa, wife of Louis XIV, is to Maria Theresa of Austria, rather than to the Wikipedia article on Maria Theresa of Spain . I tried to fix it myself, but, sadly, fell short.
It's not a major error, just a link to the incorrect Maria Theresa.
Cheers, Ivonne Rovira
missivonne@yahoo.com
*Fixed it, thanks for pointing this out. --DanielNuyu 00:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong Maria Theresa 

message: What can you say about this painting? my art teacher asserted it anticipated the lesson of "Ceçi n'est pas une pipe" [Magritte]. Do you agree?
87.7.60.200 20:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the lesson? Is it that a painted representation of an object is not the object itself? Some art teachers like to be arcane.Lestrade (talk) 02:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Las Meninas 

message: I have removed the work of a contemporary painter's homage to Velazquez. Images by Picasso and Bacon are understandable, but an article about Velazquez is not a portal for contemporary artists to gain publicity. JNW 01:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rv contemporary painter

message: This article was recently demoted from Featured article status.  This article appears to be at or near Good article status.  
Would any of the editors contributing to this article be interested in assisting in a Peer review, and nomination for Good article process?  The intent would be to regain Featured article status. EspanaViva 07:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article improvement/Peer review 

message: I know nothing about the subject, but the list of selected works appears to contain two iterations of the same painting, spaced 10 years apart.  The 1634 listing links to the painting, while the 1624 listing links to a biographical article which contains an image of the painting...dated to 1634.  I would remove this, but the list gives specific dimensions for the painting, as well as a museum that owns it.  What's up here?  This should be fixed or clarified.  65.190.89.154 22:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate? 

message: http://www.allpaintings.org/v/Baroque/Velazquez/ is a good website to put in external links. There are more than a hundred of images of his works with their genre, year, localization and some information about Velázquez. The images have a good quality.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oriolhernan (talk • contribs) 13:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is linkspam. Please read WP:EL re: guidelines on links which are encyclopedic, and those which are not (for instance, those with many advertisements). JNW 14:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  external links 

message: So, now Velazquez is Portugese?  Let me see, Santiago Ramon y Cajal, Pablo Casals, etc., etc.  I'm still looking for any Spanish person of note who isn't billed as "not Spanish" by Wikipedia.  Seems there's just an aversion to admitting any person of Spanish ancestry is worth a hoot!Cd195 (talk) 17:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Velazquez not Spanish? 

message: Although the new one (Image:Velazquez.innocent-x.jpg) looks better enlarged, the old one (Image:Diego Velázquez 048.jpg)  is brighter & looks better (350 setting) as a thumb on my screen. In truth neither is a very high quality image. I've seen the original too! Johnbod (talk) 23:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Innocent pictures

message: Born in Seville, Andalusia, Spain early on June 6, 1599, and baptized on 6 June, 
:Question: We know he was baptised on 6 June.  How do we know he was also born that same day?  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of birth/baptism

message: The link for the "The Adoration of the Magi" under Selected Works sends the user to "The Adoration of the Magi" by Bartolomé Estéban Murillo.  There is a Wikipedia entry for "The Adoration of the Magi" by Diego Velázquez, but it appears to be available in Spanish and Italian only.  The link to the Spanish entry is as follows:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoraci%C3%B3n_de_los_Magos_%28Vel%C3%A1zquez%29
Regards,
Hippitydoo (talk) 18:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong link for "The Adoration of the Magi" under Diego Velázquez' Selected Works 

message: The reference to Picasso and the others is totally inappropriate. Why is it included? Did the author think it validated Velázquez in some way?  There are many present day artists of the traditional school who would find the notion absurd and insulting.  What is the point? Jive Dadson (talk) 07:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not at all inappropriate. Such references are standard for articles on the masters, and the references to Picasso, Dali, and Bacon deal with well-known works that clearly are indebted to Velazquez, whether or not they meet with the approval of 'traditionalists' like myself. JNW (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Upon reading the lead, it seems that rather than expunging mention of 20th century artists, the introduction can be a great deal more fulsome, with much-deserved elaboration on V's stature as one of the great masters of western painting. Britannica is laudatory in its assessment, and there is a long way to go here. JNW (talk) 21:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern references

message: Reading this article, I feel it might be useful to mention Velazquez's relatively small body of work : less than 120 known works, depending on who you ask. I have a good citation for this information, but I'm not sure which section would be suitable. My first thought is to include a sentence or two at the beginning of the "selected works" list. Any thoughts from regular contributors to this article? -- Docether (talk) 15:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It could go either there or in the opening. JNW (talk) 04:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the input; I've added some prefatory text to the "selected works" list, but feel free to move it to improve the article's flow. -- Docether (talk) 14:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Output? 

message: Did he, if so put them in the article with dates of life and facts. 66.158.68.102 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 14:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did he have kids?!?!?!?!?! 

message: According to Symantec, Bloodhound.Exploit.314  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.4.14.58 (talk) 15:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Las Meninas full image has virus infection? 

message: "Velaskwez" is a horrible, jarring, simply wrong pronunciation. I've certainly heard educated people saying it that way, but it's wrong. Should the article report incorrect pronunciations (as it does in a footnote), or should it just report the correct one? I do not think it's useful to describe things that people get wrong, but only the correct and verifiable facts. 124.150.164.201 (talk) 22:49, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: As citations proliferate, a change to short citations would seem a good move and I propose to make the change if no objections. Ewulp (talk) 02:53, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. The less templated html nonsense the better. Its very hard to edit through that stuff. SFN fine by me. Ceoil (talk) 03:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

text: Yes - preferably not sfn though. Johnbod (talk) 03:11, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Its great to see work on major articles, as seen on my watchlist, however. Ceoil (talk) 07:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's languished a while; still quite a lot of EB 1911 here ... I too avoid templates in favor of the  model. Ewulp (talk) 22:54, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Much better now! Johnbod (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation style