Talk:History of painting

message: Should contain mention of anti-painting tendencies such as Miro's "murder of painting" and the advent of conceptual art. --Daniel C. Boyer
Since when has the European Renaissance been considered part of the 20th century?
Since when has the European Renaissance been considered part of the 20th century?  - T. Humiston
There's gotta be some way to merge this, Art movement, Art styles, periods and movements, and Art history - it seems like things are getting repeated over and over... --STLEric 21:15, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Old stuff

message: Are we incapable of contextualizing painting in the 21st century in history?  Or are there no emerging "movements" to add? Vanessa kelly 19:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: New category added: Contemporary painting in the 21st Century. Modernist 14:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Where's the 21st Century?

message: The period 1525-1725 is hardly covered. Does that mean European art was going through a dull phase then? Anwar 20:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing centuries

message: Quote: "The depiction of humans, animals or any another figurative subjects is forbidden within Islam to prevent believers from idolatry so there is no religiously motivated painting (or sculpture) tradition within Muslim culture."
Not to be too incredibly mean or anything, but this person is very ignorant on the subject and uses a tone as if in a soapbox to discredit Islamic art. Not only did Muslims depict the facial features of the Prophet Muhammad up until the 16th century, but every single piece of artwork in the Islamic painting section completely contradicts this statement and following statements in that part of the article. Can someone (who is somewhat knowledgeable in Islamic art) please rewrite this entire section, as the entire thing is nothing but non-sensical opinionated blabbering that doesn't belong in wikipedia. Thank you.--PericlesofAthens 15:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for helping me to return images of Islamic paintings to the deleted gallery today. I was surprised by the deletions with no warning. As to the text, I agree an expert on Islamic painting which is clearly filled with both imagery and meaning would be useful.  Modernist 22:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, it was in sore need of images. It is a shame that I am no expert on Islamic art, but I'm sure some valuable tid bits of info can be learned from the wiki article on Islamic art.--PericlesofAthens 05:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Islamic Painting

message: The gallery of art from India desperately needed some substantial pieces of art, so I have expanded it with classical works of art from India to replace some of the cheesy contemporary stuff that looked like they were painted within the last ten years.--PericlesofAthens 10:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, really cheesy, looks better now. I'm beginning to wonder about African art, I'd like someone to step up to the plate, there Modernist 15:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is just very little sub-Saharan painting surviving except the very old and the very new. Johnbod 16:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: South Asian Painting

message: thumb|center|Veltzer Doron, 2007 Contemporary painting from Israel
I removed the above from the article because there are no google hits for this artist. If you think this should be included in the history of painting please write an article about Veltzer Doron, thanks   Modernist 15:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Veltzer Doron

message: In my opinion, having the gallery images in chronological order makes sense and looks good. Modernist 17:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: East Asian Painting

message: IMO this article is hopelessly overbloated. Why is Chinese painting explained far and wide if a separate article about it exists already? Give a short explanation and if anyone wants to read on just go that specific article. Also all the images in the galleries make surfing the article unwieldy, a link to the respective Wikimedia Commons category should suffice. I don't think you need to show as many images as possible, if anyone wants to see more they should go to the Commons. Gryffindor 23:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  article is too complex 

message: This page says that the Chauvet Cave paintings show "...lions, buffalo, mammoth or humans often hunting" whereas the Chauvet page says that, "Typical of most cave art, there are no paintings of complete human figures, although there is one possible partial "Venus" figure that may represent the legs and genitals of a woman."
No matter what this partial Venus figure is doing, she is not hunting, so these two pages say different things about the same paintings. Can someone please sort this out. 81.151.182.165 (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: It is almost never acceptable to use non-free images in galleries because of WP:NFCC#8 (which is a policy, not just a guideline). Each non-free image which is truly useful in the article needs to be mentioned in the text (not just the image's caption) along with some allegation of how the image is important to the topic of Western pointing, and that statement (e.g. "Dali's Crucifiction helped usher in the surrealist movement") needs to be sourced so that it's not original research. – Quadell (talk) (random) 23:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your claim that " Each non-free image which is truly useful in the article needs to be mentioned in the text (not just the image's caption)" is new to me. I understand that just giving a title and artist name in a caption does not amount to discussion, but see no reason why a longer caption commenting on the work should not do so. Please clarify what you are saying, and produce policy references if you are indeed saying this. Johnbod (talk) 12:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you probably realize these images are important to these articles especially 20th century visual art articles. I will very carefully go over the text and reference and specify and coordinate the text to those images over the next few days. Modernist (talk) 00:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, thanks! – Quadell (talk) (random) 00:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, although it's gonna take me a few days. Modernist (talk) 00:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Logic and common sense tells us that these images illustrate style, tendency etc. For instance the Robert Mangold painting is used as an example of a style - Minimal art whose characteristics are discussed and placed in historical context. Is it that particular Mangold that is specifically discussed no - as in WP:UCS we are using examples of style. Franz Kline and Willem de Kooning demonstrate particular tendencies in Abstract Expressionism, etc. I will add text and reference only where logic and possibility make it viable. Modernist (talk) 02:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
Visual art is the parmount place where this applies. The understanding is in the seeing, and no amount of words can substitute for that. Template:Non-free 2D art states that the use of non-free images for critical commentary on 
*the work in question, 
*the artistic genre or technique of the work of art or 
*the school to which the artist belongs 
are all legitimate. The description of changing modes and ideas in art is critical commentary, whose meaning can only be properly comprehended by literally seeing it. Tyrenius (talk) 03:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on images 

message: at Talk:Western painting  please reply there:
Your claim that " Each non-free image which is truly useful in the article needs to be mentioned in the text (not just the image's caption)" is new to me. I understand that just giving a title and artist name in a caption does not amount to discussion, but see no reason why a longer caption commenting on the work should not do so. Please clarify what you are saying, and produce policy references if you are indeed saying this. Johnbod (talk) 12:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question for you 

message: Removed the tag, I've checked all the images and they seem ok to me. Modernist (talk) 04:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FUR and PD

message: can we add Edvard Munch, The scream  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.232.127.183 (talk) 05:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ADD

message: I just realized something: where's all the Aztec, Maya, Incan, Mixtec, Toltec, Huari, and other pre-Columbian American painted artwork? I've seen the murals for myself, these cultures had a strong tradition in painting. Am I really the first one to point this out?--Pericles of AthensTalk 07:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Holy crap

message: ::Good thought, maybe the section should be called The Americas and encompass Native Americans - in Canada, the USA and in Mexico, Central America, and South America. I started the section - it's called Painting in the Americas - Modernist (talk) 14:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Americas

message: Isn't it a pictograph instead of a petroglyph? --Taraborn (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect they are petroglyphs that have been painted - so as to become more visible. The article caption reads: The glyphs are painted to make them more visible. It is unknown whether they were painted originally. Composite image. Nordic Bronze Age. The article is here: ...Modernist (talk) 22:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swedish "petroglyph" 

message: I am prepared to restore the article because I think its a good article being displaced and damaged for the wrong reasons, although in good faith. I will try to integrate some imagery out of the galleries and into the text, and I'll cut some of the galleries back, and/or thin them down..I'll do my best. Everything remains, but on hold until agreement is reached. The overall idea is to reintegrate imagery into the text, and a few smaller galleries if required. For now the images are all available but on hold. Modernist (talk) 04:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've argued for the gallery format, but best to see how the discussion goes there first. Let's put the case for the optimum layout. Of course, if you think images in text is best, I won't oppose, because I haven't been editing the article anyway. Ty 05:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Restoration

message: Has a smaller gallery, inline imagery and text. I think it looks too busy, pictures on the edges, I prefer the galleries..I can write more text and try a few other placements..like in the center, if it seems appropriate. I'll need some galleries though. I am going to try a different version. Modernist (talk) 11:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The version I've just seen obstructs understanding for the sake of enforcing some kind of imaginary obligatory policy. Ridiculous. Very hard to follow and make sense of. Ty 12:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

text: It's OK. It's just not as good for the reader to get a broad idea of historical development and grouping. Ty 12:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I gotta go, when I come back I'll try another section..although I think it ain't broke and here I go fixing it...Modernist (talk) 12:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pioneer sections

message: I prefer the original version with larger galleries. This version now contains 3 double galleries of 8 and 14 galleries of 4, the 21st century still needs to be expanded as of now. I also might make Surrealism and Dada into a gallery of 8. The original version of the 20th century had larger galleries but still was both smaller and shorter. Both Johnbod and Tyrenius have made terrific observations to me. I need to learn tables and write long captions..Modernist (talk) 13:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Restoration of the 20th century, etc

message: The image :Image:Duchamp LargeGlass.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:File:20070624 Dubuffet - Court les rues.JPG
*:File:Newman-Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue.jpg
*:File:'The Robe Following Her - 4', oil on canvas painting by Jim Dine, 1984-5.jpg
*:File:'Still Life -20', mixed media work by --Tom Wesselmann--, 1962, --Albright-Knox Gallery--.jpg
*:File:'Bridge' by Kenneth Noland, 1964..jpg
*:Image:Violcand.jpg
*:Image:Ralph Goings.jpg
*:Image:Pedestal Table in the Studio.jpg
*:Image:Morley, Red Arrows.jpg
*:Image:Mama, Papa is Wounded!.jpg
*:Image:Jasper Johns's 'Map', 1961.jpg
*:      Image:Hirst-Beautiful.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Duchamp LargeGlass.jpg

message: There is a link  under the c19 heading that I have tryed to remove, but had my edit reverted. Please see the discussion on western painting for a consensus that supports my edit.Research Method (talk) 06:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Undue Prominence Hudson River School

message: I detect a bias towards US painting in this article. I think this may reflect the fact that this is the English Language Version of wikipedia.Research Method (talk) 06:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an acknowledged systemic bias of the project. See WP:BIAS. Ty 13:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Undue Prominence for US Painting

message: "Contemporary African artists follow western art movements and their paintings have little difference from occidental art works." How do they differ from Americans? Research Method (talk) 06:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: African Painting

message: Do any of the primary editors of this article have an idea of how many of the images within it are non-free images? لennavecia 20:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:NFCC]] 

message: This article is undergoing a major change concerning imagery per ...Modernist (talk) 13:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Image overhaul

message: For the record: on 8 May 2010, there were 72 non-free images in this article. The figure below shows the result of work already done to reduce the number. Ty 02:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortunately I have found certain images like the Newman to be in pd which really helps, I have been checking every image and every artist for pd imagery...Modernist (talk) 13:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Currently - (72) 51 to 44; and (66) 51 to 39; (39) 39 to 31...Modernist (talk) 12:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What would really help are a few uploads. - I'd like to have public domain images of: Joan Miro, Rene Magritte, Max Beckmann, Balthus, Otto Dix, Yves Tanguy, Frida Kahlo, Arshile Gorky, late Wassily Kandinsky, Milton Avery, and any others for starters...Modernist (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If an image was published (not just painted or exhibited) before 1923 then it would be PD in the US. Publication can be in any multiple form (poster, book, postcards, magazine, newspaper) available to the public. It's a question of getting hold of the old publication, then uploading the relevant image and referencing the proof of publication date. There's a Commons tag for life of author + 70 years (i.e. at the moment anyone who died 1939 or before). The en:wiki one is stricter. It seems something like an all black painting by Reinhardt would qualify for , but the over-use of monochromatic work would not be representative and would therefore defeat the educational intent of the article. Ty 15:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

text: The Klein is already tagged PD, as you may have noticed, because there's not enough creative content to justify a copyright claim (!). Ty 15:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, the Klein is a color as well; I'd like to include Magritte and Miro with earlier images prior to 1923, I added the 1912 Mondrian for that reason...Modernist (talk) 15:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Everybody has an opinion about art. Maybe we should put a few more monochromatic paintings in the article.  Bus stop (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd add the Reinhardt if it is uploaded...Modernist (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Subtract Reinhardt at the risk of misspelling the name. Bus stop (talk) 17:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dealing with non-free images

message: The problematic time period is History_of_painting#20th_century_Modern_and_Contemporary where most images are in copyright. This is divided by discrete movements. I will take Abstract Expressionism as an example. It has 1114 words. Per 3. above, we might think in terms of 4 images, but the actual use should be dictated by need, not just numerically.  
The basic need in an overview article of this nature is to differentiate one movement/period (or whatever the divisions are) from another, so the question to be asked is what are the essential characteristics of Abstract Expressionism and what are the minimal number of images to represent them? I suggest three modes: 1) Drip painting (Pollock) 2) color field painting (Newman) 3) expressive figuration (De Kooning), possibly 4) expressive abstraction (one of Kline/Still/Motherwell). 
This reduces the necessary images to 3 or 4, as opposed to the current 8.  I don't think the latter can be defended (in terms of wikipedia requirements), but the former can be.
If this principle is applied throughout (including the free images), then not only will it fulfill WP:NFC but also be more concise and thereby more easily apprehended by the reader.
Ty 02:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal

message: Appreciate the input, I will continue to prune the imagery...Modernist (talk) 11:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortunately I have found certain images like the Newman to be in pd which really helps, I have been checking every image and every artist for pd imagery...Modernist (talk) 13:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Currently - (72) 51 to 44; and (66) 51 to 39; (39) 39 to 31...Modernist (talk) 12:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What would really help are a few uploads. - I'd like to have public domain images of: Joan Miro, Rene Magritte, Max Beckmann, Balthus, Otto Dix, Yves Tanguy, Frida Kahlo, Arshile Gorky, late Wassily Kandinsky, Milton Avery, and any others for starters...Modernist (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If an image was published (not just painted or exhibited) before 1923 then it would be PD in the US. Publication can be in any multiple form (poster, book, postcards, magazine, newspaper) available to the public. It's a question of getting hold of the old publication, then uploading the relevant image and referencing the proof of publication date. There's a Commons tag for life of author + 70 years (i.e. at the moment anyone who died 1939 or before). The en:wiki one is stricter. It seems something like an all black painting by Reinhardt would qualify for , but the over-use of monochromatic work would not be representative and would therefore defeat the educational intent of the article. Ty 15:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

text: The Klein is already tagged PD, as you may have noticed, because there's not enough creative content to justify a copyright claim (!). Ty 15:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, the Klein is a color as well; I'd like to include Magritte and Miro with earlier images prior to 1923, I added the 1912 Mondrian for that reason...Modernist (talk) 15:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Everybody has an opinion about art. Maybe we should put a few more monochromatic paintings in the article.  Bus stop (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd add the Reinhardt if it is uploaded...Modernist (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Subtract Reinhardt at the risk of misspelling the name. Bus stop (talk) 17:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Response

message: Normally we would not put non-free images in galleries, but in the text relating to specific images. I think the article is best served in this instance by the use of galleries. The section as a whole discusses a movement. The paintings here are not used specifically to show the individual artist, but to show representative works of the features that characterise a movement. Per  this is a legitimate usage:
 for critical commentary on
    * the work in question,
    * the artistic genre or technique of the work of art or
    * the school to which the artist belongs
The grouping of the works together helps to present the movement characteristics, and facilitates the comparison of one movement with a similar grouping of work in another section by another movement. To disperse the works in the text would hinder this and be counter-productive for the educational purpose, hence making a weaker claim for fair use. Ty 16:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Johnbod (talk) 18:10, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Galleries or images in text

message: Either someone who knows the subject can trim a particular section; this can then be open to discussion, or sections can be dealt with one by one, with a section below dedicated to each section in the article. I'll open one as a trial. We should be going for the archetypal images. Ty 18:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: A way forward

message: History of painting#19th century: Neo-classicism, History painting, Romanticism, Impressionism, Post Impressionism, Symbolism
I suggest one painting to represent each genre. Any suggestions? Ty 18:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 19th century

message: A template was added to the top of the page claiming excessive or improper use of copyrighted material. The editor who placed the template should indicate which images are excessive and which copyrighted material is being improperly used. Otherwise, the template should be removed. freshacconci talktalk 18:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 43 non-free files being used on this article. That number could probably be reduced to about 10 or fewer without any real issues. But I really doubt that there is a need for all 43 non-free files that are currently on this page. ΔT The only constant 21:37, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am reducing the number as I can. The difficulty is in the contemporary period. So far I have eliminated many and/or switched to PD when possible over a dozen and I will continue reducing the numbers...Modernist (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, a summary of images and their statuses can be found at User:Δ/Sandbox 4 ΔT The only constant 21:52, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the list, I knocked one down...Modernist (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions 
;What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Jan van Eyck 091.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: A large number of the paintings in the galleries here have their own articles - most in the 19th century section for example - but there are no links to the articles. No doubt the same is true of the sister "western" article. One way to check is via the image file "used in" links, if we only have one version. Johnbod (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That is complicated by the fact that we are not using titles in the captions - just artist names. To have workable links we need to add titles...Modernist (talk) 12:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to paintings 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:44, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Lascaux-aurochs.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Kandinsky- comp-8-580x401.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Regarding Crisco 1492's deletion of the Kahlo self-portrait: This issue was discussed at length in 2010 and it was agreed that the image would remain on only those three articles. At the time it was long discussed with many of the members of the project who focus on fair-use. The image was deemed to satisfy this Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. and was voted acceptable in those select cases. Kahlo was an important painter who was known for her self portraits in particular and she is especially important to the history of painting. I am going to return those fair use rationales and images to those articles. Thank you...Modernist (talk) 23:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Frida Kahlo

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Orca mitica nasca.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, File:Apparatus and hand.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Apparatus and hand.jpg)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Apparatus and hand.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: I am very confused about the second paragraph from the top of the page. It has a good premise, that both West and East influenced each other, but I am not so sure about the statement claiming that Europe learned from Africa, Japan, China, Islam etc... before any of those learned from Europe. When, for instance, in early history, did Japan or China ever influence Western paintings? Islam did, perhaps, but the reverse is equally true during that time. The only civilization of the East that I would say influenced Europe in painting before Europe influenced the East, would be, perhaps, Ancient Egypt. Wikipedia gets a little carried away with belittling Europe and inflating the greatness of everyone else at times.Pierceunique (talk) 04:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Eastern influences on Western painting????? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on History of painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140809021204/http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C05EED91E3CF933A25754C0A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2 to http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C05EED91E3CF933A25754C0A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: in content:
3	Western painting
3.1	Egypt, Greece and Rome
It's Western??--Albedo @  16:11, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  3	Western painting 3.1	Egypt, Greece and Rome 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927161432/http://www.admu.edu.ph/offices/mirlab/panublion/islas.html to http://www.admu.edu.ph/offices/mirlab/panublion/islas.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081211173809/http://www.bartleby.com/65/co/CounterR.html to http://www.bartleby.com/65/co/CounterR.html
*Added  tag to http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/sammlung6/allg/buch.xml?docname=blondel1737
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080925010715/http://www.guggenheimcollection.org/site/artist_work_md_109_7.html to http://www.guggenheimcollection.org/site/artist_work_md_109_7.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on History of painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110305222544/http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19991017/iex17018.html to http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19991017/iex17018.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071220174924/http://www.21stcenturyindianart.com/women.htm to http://www.21stcenturyindianart.com/women.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101204055532/http://chdmuseum.nic.in/art_gallery/nine_masters.html to http://chdmuseum.nic.in/art_gallery/nine_masters.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070319123717/http://www.accd.edu/sac/vat/arthistory/arts1303/Rome4.htm to http://www.accd.edu/sac/vat/arthistory/arts1303/Rome4.htm
*Added  tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_5_40/ai_82469521
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080821042905/http://www.guggenheimcollection.org/site/glossary_De_Stijl.html to http://www.guggenheimcollection.org/site/glossary_De_Stijl.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:11, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C05EED91E3CF933A25754C0A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070405094841/http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_artqa/2003-09/24/content_39769.htm to http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_artqa/2003-09/24/content_39769.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927105016/http://www.nezu-muse.or.jp/syuuzou/kaiga/10169.html to http://www.nezu-muse.or.jp/syuuzou/kaiga/10169.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: *You destroyed some of my hard work as well as the hard work of others on this page...Modernist (talk) 02:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop reverting my contributions to the article. You're not the only person who gets to decide what's written in the article.  Max Eisenhardt (talk) 20:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, but I'm not deleting information I'm adding it. And where is the consensus? I don't see any discussion about this issue. I don't consider it my job to raise it. Max Eisenhardt (talk) 20:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Destroying hard work 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:07, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:09, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Sounds like a good idea to delete some images? At least 20-30% of them, anybody? Danial Bass (talk) 18:01, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many images