1597:
asked you to do more than once, but I will explain again), you will find that the most frequent editor, who has added scores of unsourced content, and who primarily only edits Art & Language, Château de
Montsoreau-Museum of Contemporary Art where the permanent collection of Art & Language is held and where they had added a tremendous amount of puffery, Philippe Méaille the owner of the Art & Language collection and the president of the Chateau de Montsoreau museum which houses that collection, and whose other edits are to frequently add Art & Language content to other articles, as well as half of their article creations having to do with Art & Language, including the article on the building that houses the A&L collection (which was deleted four times before being accepted under another article name). As an experienced editor, that seems quite odd to me, and is clearly indicative of conflict of interest editing, or worse, UPE, undisclosed paid editing. And that they never responded to the message I left for them regarding COI, is a pattern I've seen before. There have also been numerous other single-purpose editors. I have already communicated this, please stop making demands for justification when I have already done so. The maintenance tags that you so vehemently object to are are a helpful way to alert the community that work is needed on a specific article. I will continue to clean. up the unsourced content and original research and the remainder of COI content, but I won't be doing it on your timeline as you are certainly not the boss of me. I have other priorities on the encyclopedia and in real life. As previously suggested, please try to cultivate patience. Thank you and goodbye.
1763:
find it very rude, and would like an explanation, and preferably an apology. I do not understand your POV problem with lists of galleries or affiliated artists being added to this article years ago by someone with an interest, since your complaint seems to be about formatting and use of references, rather than the accuracy or notability of the information. I do not understand your NPOV point about the article "promote and raise the profile of A&L". Are you suggesting that this very short and almost empty article is too big for
England's only conceptual art group? Do you want me to wait until you add NPOV with sourced descriptions of the artist as unimportant, insignificant, irrelevant before removing the COI tag? Are you, as an American, qualified to judge the importance of this article to English art history? Regarding "promotional links" surely the Artist's representative gallery deserves a link, and it was a mistake to remove this link. Please reinstate it, or provide a rationale for omitting it.
1094:*The Coen Brothers is an excellent example for NOT merging. Art & Language was a collaborative group of individuals - that is parallel to the Coen Brothers. Art-Language is a thing - a print publication. And that publication was only associated with Art & Language the colab group for 7 of its 20 year run. The other 13 years it was edited and run by people outside of the A&L group. So to compare this situation to the Coen Brothers is like saying "merge the Quay Brothers into the Film Magazine article" (if there were one). It simply does not make sense. The majority of the years A-L was published, it was NOT a project of A&L. What may be confusing to the OP is that the names are similar. Both articles can be cleaned up but that is not a reason to merge.
1961:- please explain your complaint. If you look at policy it clearly states that tags should not be used as a badge of shame. For many years the article had 3 tags pointing out the obvious, with repetition. I do not understand, or appreciate, why quoting wikipedia policy makes you suspect a COI, nor do I understand why thinking that the article is short and bad, and adding all the available images from wikicommons should make you suspect it. I have been editing subjects including art and terrorism for over 10 years. I have consistently asked for an understandable justification for maintaining the tag, and I think you owe me an apology because, rather than explain your reason for keeping the tag, you attack me. As far as I can understand you are an admin."
1824:- please explain your complaint. If you look at policy it clearly states that tags should not be used as a badge of shame. For many years the article had 3 tags pointing out the obvious, with repetition. I do not understand, or appreciate, why quoting wikipedia policy makes you suspect a COI, nor do I understand why thinking that the article is short and bad, and adding all the available images from wikicommons should make you suspect it. I have been editing subjects including art and terrorism for over 10 years. I have consistently asked for an understandable justification for maintaining the tag, and I think you owe me an apology because, rather than explain your reason for keeping the tag, you attack me. As far as I can understand you are an admin.
586:
important as Paul Dirac. I'm not comparing Art
Language's contribution to that of quantum mechanics or cricket. Nor am I comparing Michael Baldwin, Mel Ramsden and Charles Harrison to Paul Dirac. Rather (if this isn't too big a word for you) it was a metaphor, serving to highlight the absurd skew in the article. The thinly veiled - and moderately juvenile - attempts to radicalize and politicize the ex-members reeks of a desperate need to make them sound more important than they really are. I'm sorry for whoever you are, but please stop editing this article, and find a more constructive way to make yourself feel important, and please contain your slightly priapic relationship with Jerry Saltz's crtiticism.
1077:. They don't discuss the Coen brothers and the overlap between the biographical article and the movie article is minimal. Now have a look at these two articles. Both are relatively short (not something you can say about the Coen brothers bio and the articles on their movies) and their is a huge overlap in content. That the magazine and the movement somewhat split ways is not a problem, the article on the brothers also discusses their solo work. The question here is not whether the magazine or the group are notable or not. It's whether it is useful to have two separate articles on subjects that are intricately intertwined and hugely overlap (and that overlap cannot be reduced either). --
1741:. Extensive lists of permanent collections and affiliated artists serves to promote and raise the profile of A&L, which is not what this project is for. The tag is not a badge of shame, it's showing that the issues have not been addressed and is something the reader should be aware of. When they finish their cleanup, Netherzone or other unaffiliated editors may opt to remove the tag. If you have a conflict of interest with regard to A&L, you really need to disclose it @
995:(didn't I sit behind you in homeroom?). I'm not an expert on these topic, but upon skimming the pages the magazine seems quite notable, as does the group. If the lede of the magazine page is to be believed then its influence is historically important and seemingly worthy of its own article. Yes, on a quick read I can see that both articles need work, and will help putter around in them now and then in the short-run, if just to get a mental map of the subjects.
1799:). I have done nothing that merits issuing you an apology. There are no expert editors and every single one of us is qualified to provide an opinion on an article, it's contents and its sourcing. Your conduct, persistent interest in removing what you believe to be a "badge of shame", concern about the size makes me think yes, you have a conflict here. I'm going to be offline for several hours but will come back to this later today.
1513:
these should be sourced for verification. The COI template should remain until that specific matter is fully resolved. BTW, I have been familiar with the works of Art & Language since the 1970s and it is a shame this article has been in such dismal shape since at least 2009. Moving forward, please only add content that is sourced to secondary, verifiable, reliable sources that are fully independent of the subject. Thank you.
233:
208:
78:
53:
283:
408:
142:
124:
365:
152:
22:
1499:
removing the tag. You still haven't explained them properly. What do you want changed in the article to remove the tag? You have already added "unsourced content", and "insufficient references" - how does this tag help? As far as I can see it is simply duplication, and I'm not sure it is true or relevant - when did this happen? What BLP violations are you talking about?
2373:
that already has commercial issues only because they represent the artist makes little sense, if any at all. It seems, L'Origine du monde, that you might need to do more research before making any more suggestions of this nature and you should seriously rethink the way you interact with other editors. The way you're arguing here is the opposite of
856:
1113:
production in 19 numbers and to compare with the Coen brothers wikipedia should have one article dedicated to each number of the journal as every single one is a significant release of a significant artist work. I am interested to know where you did read on wikipedia that the length of an article was a quality criteria? --
2069:
I cannot see the redacted edits, and I don't have time right now to go further back through article history, but feel strongly that it is not necessary to add this information about Lisson
Gallery since there is a clear financial link between Lisson Gallery and Art & Language and their associated
1530:
please explain what BLP violations you are talking about, and what exactly you want changed to remove the COI tag, with no information from you about that here it is impossible to understand your desires. Judging from your comments on my talk page, the editor in question last edited this page 3 years
1498:
I clearly stated in my edit summary "Removed COI tag because not properly explained on talk page - no editor identified, and editor who added the tag is not discussing his addition." There is no information on this page to support your claims, and I asked you to explain them, and waited a week before
636:
I have faith in any editor to make changes to the article without my supervision. Make sure that the material you are putting in is properly sourced, be bold and have at it. If you don't know how to use the inline references to reference items, you can either stop by my talk page and I can give you
607:
Syrthiss: could you please tell me how to go about making serious, constructive changes to this article? Do I really need to list the problems one by one, or can I provide a new, more accurate text? While I am willing, if I absolutely have to, to go through each of the problems with you, there are so
1615:
you have not explained how NPOV has been violated. Please explain what POV you think has been promoted by COI editors and what work is needed. The tag is basically useless without a clear description of problems with the article, and I do not understand why you won't give one other than past members
1472:
COI: the article has been heavily edited by single purpose editors, editors who never responded to COI inquiries nor made a disclosure, editors adding COPYVIO material, SPA editor adding huge listings of works held by the collector and who owns the museum whose primary function is to house Art &
1447:
are these the same blocks of text that have been tagged with citation needed tags? Guidelines clearly say "Redundant issues: Please do not insert tags that are too similar to or redundant with each other. " Why do you want to add another tag? Please explain above what changes you want to the article
1112:
It is indeed an excellent example for Not merging. We already went through this as a discussion and you are very welcome to expand both of them. The fact is that Art & Language is an artist group and Art-Language is a body of work produced by Art & Language. The journal span over 20 years of
2266:
yes, as you can see from my successful un-block request on my talk page, or my edits over the last 14 years, I am interested in this article. I don't understand why it is so hard to edit it. Do you accept the two sources I gave above? Could you reinstate the information about their gallery based on
1711:
I believe tags need to be justified if challenged, and not used as a badge of shame - do you disagree? I clearly explained that I removed the tags because they were unexplained and unjustified. What are ELs, and how do artist lists relate to NPOV? Neither you nor
Netherzone have explained what POV
1479:
who added large amounts of unsourced content failed to ever respond to the COI notification on their user page, thus the COI issues are NOT resolved. If you examine the article history, you will see that I have extensively worked on the article, and have cleaned up some, but not all of the problems
2372:
has pushed this inclusion without providing any further background, when in fact they could have put together some potentially valuable edits about exhibitions of Art&Language at Lisson held during the 1970s and 1980s to help expand the article. But inserting gallery name name into the article
1920:
fix the issue is to add properly formatted citations to reliable sources (like the museum collection entries themselves. I've started to do those searches at my own reasonable pace. The maintenance tag should not be removed until all the entries are sourced, and if some of them are not verifiable,
1762:
I see no justification for the tag in that text. Please can you make your reasoning more transparent. I do not understand your, or
Netherzone's unpleasant suggestions that I am doing "promotional editing" or have some undisclosed COI. What exactly leads you to making this unpleasant insinuation? I
1596:
I have already provided justifications several times on the Art & Language article talk page and in my edit summaries. Just because you don't agree with those justifications is not a reason for you to bludgeon the process. If you would kindly look through the article history (which I have also
500:
In the spirit of encouraging dialogue: IP address, I don't understand why you think
Baldwin and Ramsden are excluded in the article. They are mentioned throughout. You say there are absurdities in the article. Please state here on the talkpage what specifically you want changed and we can consider
1667:
please explain what problems you have identified with the very short text other than "citations needed" for the sections on "Past members and associates", and "Permanent collections" these should be sourced for verification ". I can't see any NPOV issues in the text - please explain why you have
1512:
I have removed the unsourced content and/or original research that has been unsourced for years, and removed the maintenance tags for footnotes and original research. I added two inline hatnotes for "citations needed" for the sections on "Past members and associates", and "Permanent collections"
447:
As a person with an interest in art history I have problems with this page: it is utterly incoherent, and it is totally inaccurate. For example, there is a less than subtle attempt to exclude the founding member, Michael
Baldwin, and the current member, Mel Ramsden. This is merely to serve as an
1328:
the article has been heavily edited by single purpose editors, editors who never responded to COI inquiries nor made a disclosure, editors adding COPYVIO material, SPA editor adding huge listings of works held by the collector and who owns the museum whose primary function is to house Art &
2087:
they are represented by Lisson
Gallery. This is true, and important, and the link is to their official page on that gallery's website, as discussed in the previous section links to official websites are allowed. Why are you opposed to the article mentioning that there is a clear financial link
585:
I would like to wade in with an opinion on this confusion, even if it is two years too late. The entire article reads like a discussion of
Australian cricket in the thirties which is desperate to ignore Donald Bradman; it's like a description of quantum mechanics acknowledging Enrico Fermi as
1689:
you're edit warring, and because you think you're "right" doesn't give you license to do so. I'm not going to template warn you as you've been here long enough to know better than this. Speaking as someone who edits in art related articles, this one needs a major haircut to even approach NPOV
1470:, please stop removing the COI maintenance tag without resolving the issuesit has been removed three times now. The last time you did so, you stated that there was no justification for it, this is incorrect. The COI issues are not resolved, the justification is above on this talk page stating
1362:
that's a start. Please explain what exactly is wrong with the article now, and ideally fix it. Which major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject, and which edits? Presumably the copyvio stuff isn't there any more? Where do you get the info about
1150:- The articles should remain as two distinct articles. After 1972 the group Art & Language was no longer so directly involved with the publication Art-Language. It was primarily a stand-alone publication from 1972 to 1985 when publication ceased. That is 13 years of its 20-year run.
937:. Both articles have a lot of overlap in contents, even using the same image. The difference between the two (& vs -) is a bit too subtle for me, and also for the average reader, I assume. Merging the two will provide for a more complete and coherent article than the current two. --
1959:" I do not understand your problem with lists of galleries or affiliated artists being added to this article years ago by someone with an interest, since your complaint seems to be about formatting and use of references, rather than the accuracy or notability of the information."
1822:" I do not understand your problem with lists of galleries or affiliated artists being added to this article years ago by someone with an interest, since your complaint seems to be about formatting and use of references, rather than the accuracy or notability of the information."
569:
While I appreciate your grasp of big words, if you can cite specific examples where the text is wrong...with references to why it is wrong...I'm sure that the article can be improved. Otherwise I expect the wall of text will continue to be reverted for the referenced text.
2235:
I don't understand why you claim that. If you look at a musical artist their label is normally mentioned. The artists are represented by the gallery, and reliable sources support that. Their official site is hosted by the gallery- do you agree that it should be linked
1561:
I have removed the tag, because as far as I can see there is now nothing wrong with the article in terms of NPOV or BLP, and everything seems sourced. Please do not reinstate the tag without an explanation of what is now biased in the article/wrong with it because of
1318:
Maintenance tags were boldly removed without resolving the underlying issues. The tags were then restored and were removed again in an edit-war manner without starting a discussion here nor resolving the issues; additionally more unsourced material was added.
1890:
I have turned the long list of artists into a short paragraph, and collapsed the list of collections that holds the work. Please can we now remove the tag, or explain to me why it is important that some of the collections that do hold the work are not properly
1547:
the tag you added said "It may require cleanup to comply with Knowledge's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page" please can you explain what clean up is needed, and how the article now deviates from
412:
1053:
The Coen brothers is indeed a great example against the merging as each one of their films have a separate article. Art & Language is the name of the artists (Coen brothers) and Art-Language is the name of a work of them (The Big Lebowsky for
608:
many that we are likely to be here for a very long time indeed. It seems odd to me that you would view a text as in some way 'superior' or appropriate - or indeed more coherently encyclopedic - simply because it was posted on here first.
828:"Starting at the beginning of the 1970s, individuals such as Ian Burn, Michael Corris, Preston Heller, Graham Howard, Joseph Kosuth, Andrew Menard, Terry Smith and from Coventry Philip Pilkington and David Rushton joined the group."
1072:
It is indeed an excellent example, but for merging. Have a look at the actual articles. The article on the Coen brothers mentions their movies, but doesn't give much detail on those. The individual movies have detailed articles
1233:- The journal is a monumental work of art for the conceptual art, therefore the article should be kept. Anyway, what the two articles describe are two distinct things (artist group & journal), just with the similar names.--
1668:
added this tag saying " It may require cleanup to comply with Knowledge's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page". It isn't needed if there are no problems with the text.
2361:
While there is nothing fundamentally wrong with mentioning gallery representation of a contemporary artist, any such inclusion should make sense within the context of the article and contribute to encyclopedic purpose as
1429:. BLP violations since much of these unsourced additions concern living persons;. Self-sourced content. Maintenance tag for citations for verification repeatedly removed rather than resolving the problems in the article.
540:
Ethicoaestheticist: I am already tired of trying to correct your text. I have no desire to list its absurd misapprehensions, omissions and oversights. It is simultaneously provincial and tendentious. In a word: goofy.
2341:
They are important, but they work in the system, and make money too, and it seems strange to want to point out that the gallery is editing the article, but avoid naming the gallery. Official links are allowed.
1169:
I have changed my position on this and think the two articles can successfully be merged. I misunderstood something I read about the magazine editorial staff changes, and retract my previous comments on this.
1035:. Each one of them is notable, but we don't have separate articles about them because of the huge overlap. Same here. Both the movement and the magazine appear to be notable, but that doesn't mean that we
1712:
is being pushed in the article, and I can't see a POV reading the article, please explain it to me in words. Do you also see the BLP issues that netherzone identified, but refuses to explain. Best wishes
1905:
Re: the short paragraph of associated members - I think the short paragraph works very well however the formatting needs adjusting: the citations should go after the punctuation (commas), not before.
973:
Both articles are currently in a deplorable state. If some of the fluff is cut away, I don't see why the magazine, the movement's mouthpiece, could not be a section in the article on the movement. --
1191:- The articles should remain as two distinct articles. One is a notable artists group and one is notable work of this group. The journal Art-Language is included in major museums collection such as
1690:
regardless of whether the editors at issue are still actively editing. Among the issues I see, unsourced and red linked artist lists and ELs mixed in where there should be reliable references.
469:
IMO, the referenced and wiki'ed version is superior. There's been no mention of the sources for the current, and no communication from the new accounts who changed it so I'm going to revert.
1575:
Sorry, I see that past members and collections lack citations. I do not see how this violates NPOV - please explain. I don't think that justifies keeping the COI- please explain why it does.
1957:- please explain why it is not so. If you read your previous comment you will see that your complaint about the lists was as I summarised, but for some reason you didn't finish my sentence
1820:- please explain why it is not so. If you read your previous comment you will see that your complaint about the lists was as I summarised, but for some reason you didn't finish my sentence
1480:
yet. The unsourced content added by the COI SPA involves living persons and is thus also a BLP violation. Please stop edit warring over the maintenance tag, and try to develop patience.
832:
Based on the syntax, I am not certain if Philip Pilkington and David Rushton are both from Coventry, or Phillip is the only one. Also, a link to what Coventry is would be appreciated.
1398:
Template:More footnotes needed instead of Citations needed for verification. This is the template that was there before, and seems appropriate given number of references and OR tag.
1296:
1938:
are you sure that COI is the right maintenence tag for this situation? I don't think that it is intended to for this, and it doesn't read as though it is intended for it either.
2070:
artists. This seems like promotional and possible COI editing. I think the edit about Lisson Gallery should be removed because the encyclopedia is not a venue for advertising.
1737:
where the links tell nothing about A&L's significance. They should be wiki linked to the institution and verified to their collection via proper referencing, such as NZ
1196:
448:
example of the absurdities which are, unfortunately, persistent throughout the article (there are countless and less trivial examples)... I hope they will be addressed.
867:
2205:
why not? Are you claiming it isn't notable? Lisson has been their gallery for a long time. The gallery has their official website which should certainly be linked to.
2322:
need to include a free advertisment for their gallery. The encyclopedic importance of their work is their art historical signifcance, that is why they are notable -
1335:
there are multiple claims, statements, and “facts” throughout the article, including multiple paragraphs, lists of artists and collections without proper sourcing.
2188:
They look possible, but not required unless they report with significant coverage, it just looks like spam, Knowledge doesn't usually mention galleries like this.
637:
some examples or you can just place whatever reference text in parenthesis after the text it is supporting and someone can fix the markup later. Hope this helps.
765:
761:
747:
2433:
1916:
is a key policy of the encyclopedia. Shuttering unsourced material within a collapsed container does not fix the issue that the collections are unsourced. What
2249:
You appear to be heavily invested in this article, if you have a reliable, independent source then it could be added, but I don't see it as being essential.
1652:
I have explained it will take time to go through several years of edits by connected editors. Do not remove the template again without fixing the issues.
1266:
2428:
2176:
2004:
424:
2318:
Art & Language stands on its art historical importance as a key conceptual art collective of the late 20th century. Their Knowledge article does
1789:
I do not understand your problem with lists of galleries or affiliated artists being added to this article years ago eby someone with an interest
174:
84:
58:
2423:
2292:
2111:
1969:
1866:
1851:
1583:
1570:
1556:
1406:
1393:
1832:
1774:
1720:
349:
2275:
2244:
2213:
1421:
Large blocks of unsourced content regarding living persons have been unsourced for many years, therefore indicating original research
849:
593:
2122:
I agree with your actions here. If an independent reliable source discussed Lisson's representation of A&L, it might make sense.
2352:
2096:
1946:
1676:
1624:
1539:
1507:
1456:
1377:
955:, as one is a notable group (with a large article) and one is the notable journal. Altough related, these are two different topics.
521:
This is an encyclopedia article. References good. Dumping exhaustive lists of exhibitions/awards etc. and removing references bad.--
455:
165:
129:
2018:, I object to the addition of a commercial gallery because Lisson Gallery is one of many of the long-term COI and COPYVIO problems.
1289:
557:
713:
1899:
392:
301:
1988:
This is true, and important, so I added it to the lede. I think their gallery's website is a reasonable source for this info.
703:
624:
411:
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
384:
376:
293:
239:
213:
1276:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
317:
2284:]. Currently all mentions of the Lisson Gallery have been removed from the article. This seems strange, and wrong to me.
1304:
808:
656:
526:
506:
333:
33:
2023:
Today User:L’Origine du monde added, “They are represented by the Lisson Gallery” with a link to the gallery website.
2282:
As far as I can see, they have been with the Lisson Gallery since the 1970s, and have had numerous exhibitions there
2267:
them? Do you agree that there should be a link to their gallery's official page about them at the end of the article?
2045:, added COPYVIO content from Lisson Gallery on 19 February 2022 (now redacted), then User:DanCherek removed it here:
1954:
please reply. As I wrote 2 days ago, "Surely that is an official link therefore allowed by the policy you linked to
2145:
2059:
added COPYVIO material from Lisson Gallery on 17 February 2022 (now redacted), then User:DanCherek removed it here:
1806:
1751:
1697:
1531:
ago, but perhaps I am mistaken. It is not clear from looking at the edit history what you mean, please elaborate.
1013:
Upon reading more of it I'm seeing what you mean. Maybe other editors will come by and take a look at the pages.
764:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
2367:
2346:
2286:
2269:
2238:
2207:
2170:
2127:
2105:
2090:
2015:
1998:
1990:
1963:
1940:
1912:
the reason why the tag exists is because the collections are not referenced, and therefore are not verifiable.
1893:
1860:
1845:
1826:
1768:
1742:
1714:
1686:
1670:
1618:
1589:
1577:
1564:
1550:
1533:
1501:
1467:
1450:
1400:
1387:
1371:
1260:
1221:
1592:
because you had pinged me in multiple venues despite my asking you not to do that. Here is what I wrote there:
824:
I have some concerns about the choices in listing off notable members of the group. The text currently reads:
2254:
2223:
2193:
1300:
1204:
1192:
1118:
1059:
799:
685:
652:
597:
522:
502:
343:
297:
693:
459:
2258:
2227:
2197:
2079:
1930:
1812:
1757:
1607:
1522:
2140:
2011:
1951:
1801:
1746:
1708:
1692:
837:
783:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
771:
39:
1385:
COI tag removed, since you failed to justify it, and there is no other mention of it on this talk page.
684:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
912:
merge on the grounds of independent notability and distinct scope, but to disambiguate with hatnotes.
2331:
2218:
The gallery may be notable but the fact they represent Art & Language isn't necessarily notable.
2075:
1926:
1657:
1603:
1518:
1485:
1434:
1349:
1344:
The maintenance tags will be restored. Please do not remove them again without resolving the issues.
1175:
1156:
1101:
1082:
1044:
1018:
1000:
978:
960:
942:
738:
612:
589:
553:
549:
545:
451:
244:
218:
89:
63:
1369:
this is obvious per the two issues above - have removed due to being obvious per the other two tags.
21:
2374:
2324:
what is important is their art historical value, not their market value or where to buy their work.
1238:
1217:
616:
1448:
to remove the COI tag you added earlier. Remember that a tag is not intended as a badge of shame.
307:
173:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2263:
2250:
2232:
2219:
2202:
2189:
2135:
2042:
1200:
1114:
1055:
642:
620:
575:
489:
474:
432:
339:
323:
157:
768:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
784:
1734:
917:
677:
311:
2056:
863:
714:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090922233350/http://www.frieze.com:80/issue/review/art_language
1764:
1216:- The encyclopedia needs both of these articles. They need to be expanded, not shortened. --
833:
327:
2138:
and I both believe you're heavily invested in this article and yet you have not disclosed.
1329:
Language’s works, edits made by several commercial galleries that represent A&L, etc.
791:
2385:
2363:
2327:
2119:
2084:
2071:
1935:
1922:
1726:
1682:
1653:
1612:
1599:
1544:
1527:
1514:
1495:
1481:
1444:
1430:
1382:
1359:
1345:
1171:
1152:
1097:
1078:
1040:
1014:
996:
992:
974:
956:
938:
704:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090601092918/http://frieze.com:80/issue/review/art_language1
1473:
Language’s works, edits made by several commercial galleries that represent A&L, etc.
484:
Oh well, guess I'll be back by on monday to revert from your unformatted mess. Cheerio.
1285:
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
2131:
1981:
1784:
1426:
1234:
750:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
790:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
2417:
2404:
1796:
1792:
1616:
and collections lack citations- the significance of which to NPOV I don't understand.
1476:
1032:
874:
638:
571:
485:
470:
428:
1650:
You have removed it four times in a little over a week without resolving the issues.
651:
I agree. Be bold. You obviously know about the subject. I'm happy to help as well.--
1422:
1253:
933:
913:
717:
707:
1913:
757:
416:
407:
170:
364:
232:
207:
77:
52:
2378:
2343:
1955:
1818:
1817:
Surely that is an official link therefore allowed by the policy you linked to
1258:
note at the top of the articles and vice versa to aid navigation between them.
756:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
147:
292:
to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
2158:
Or Death of the Artist Art World Dissidents and Their Alternative Identities
2387:
2335:
2326:
To include a link to their commercial-market showplace is promotionalism.
2151:
1703:
1661:
1489:
1438:
1353:
1308:
1242:
1225:
1208:
1179:
1160:
1122:
1105:
1086:
1063:
1048:
1022:
1004:
982:
964:
946:
931:
I am proposing to merge the current article with the one on the magazine,
921:
881:
841:
813:
660:
646:
628:
601:
579:
561:
530:
510:
493:
478:
463:
436:
141:
123:
855:
694:
https://web.archive.org/web/20060420080300/http://blurting-in.zkm.de:80/
151:
1681:
I have read through the article and the history and agree with @
1281:
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
359:
277:
15:
862:
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect
1908:
Re; the now collapsed collections and the maintenance tag -
1314:
Maintenance tag removal without fixing the underlying issues
854:
723:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
697:
391:
here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or
363:
2048:
They only made 3 edits to WP which was to add this content.
1781:
surely the Artist's representative gallery deserves a link
1779:
You do not understand how Knowledge works as evidenced by
1252:
This article is about the art group. For the journal, see
688:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
290:
contributors may be personally or professionally connected
2060:
2046:
2033:
2024:
1857:
1738:
1730:
681:
388:
2126:
does not justify adding yet another commercial link. @
2366:
had alluded to earlier. What worries me here is that
402:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
901:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
169:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
760:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
2405:https://www.lissongallery.com/artists/art-language
1197:Château de Montsoreau-Museum of Contemporary Art
718:http://www.frieze.com/issue/review/art_language/
708:http://www.frieze.com/issue/review/art_language1
242:, a project which is currently considered to be
87:, a project which is currently considered to be
2134:is not becoming of an editor of your tenure. @
2088:between Lisson Gallery and Art & Language?
1295:Participate in the deletion discussion at the
1250:Two separate notable entities. Perhaps add an
746:This message was posted before February 2018.
904:A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
8:
2377:and does not help make the article better.
2062:This was the only edit they ever made to WP
1341:this is obvious per the two issues above.
202:
118:
47:
1765:Art & Language page at Lisson Gallery
676:I have just modified 3 external links on
425:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
1841:Does this look like a promotional edit?
1735:Art_&_Language#Permanent_collections
1725:External links (ELs) are those such as @
2397:
2101:Is buisness insider a reliable source?
423:Above undated message substituted from
373:Individuals with a conflict of interest
204:
120:
49:
19:
2123:
2041:Previously, a single purpose editor ,
2032:I had removed it the day before here:
1958:
1821:
1788:
1780:
1595:
1471:
389:request corrections or suggest content
383:not to directly edit the article. See
99:Knowledge:WikiProject Contemporary Art
1588:I had answered you on your talk page
735:to let others know (documentation at
102:Template:WikiProject Contemporary Art
7:
2434:Articles with connected contributors
2055:Another single purpose editor, User:
895:The following discussion is closed.
238:This article is within the scope of
163:This article is within the scope of
83:This article is within the scope of
1333:Citations needed for verification:
38:It is of interest to the following
14:
1685:that the COI tag should remain. @
680:. Please take a moment to review
517:Encyclopedia article not a resume
183:Knowledge:WikiProject Visual arts
2429:WikiProject Visual arts articles
1475:. Additionally, one of the main
1272:The discussion above is closed.
406:
379:the subject of the article, are
281:
231:
206:
186:Template:WikiProject Visual arts
150:
140:
122:
76:
51:
20:
1733:. Some still remain present in
1243:14:23, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
1039:have two separate articles. --
385:Knowledge:Conflict of interest
254:Knowledge:WikiProject Coventry
1:
1490:22:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
1457:16:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
1439:23:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
1407:21:53, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
1394:21:29, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
1378:21:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
1354:00:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
1075:about those particular movies
1031:A great example here are the
661:23:32, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
647:13:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
629:11:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
580:12:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
562:11:36, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
531:20:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
511:20:48, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
494:15:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
479:12:29, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
464:00:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
257:Template:WikiProject Coventry
177:and see a list of open tasks.
2424:C-Class visual arts articles
2168:By Nicola McCartney · 2018 ?
1980:They are represented by the
814:16:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
602:00:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
437:14:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
85:WikiProject Contemporary Art
1322:The tags were as follows:
1309:05:22, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
1267:13:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
1226:13:04, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
2450:
1996:21:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1425:and/or not complying with
1290:Art-LanguageV3No1-1974.jpg
1251:
1209:14:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
1180:14:02, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
1161:19:10, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
1123:16:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
1106:22:10, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
1087:20:42, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
1064:17:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
777:(last update: 5 June 2024)
673:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
2388:02:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
2353:23:34, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2336:17:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2293:11:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2276:11:42, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2259:11:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2245:11:30, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2228:10:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2214:10:44, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2198:10:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2177:10:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2152:14:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2112:10:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2097:10:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2080:00:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
2005:21:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1970:00:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
1947:23:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
1931:17:18, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
1900:21:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1867:21:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1852:19:31, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1833:18:29, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1813:18:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1775:17:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1758:17:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1721:10:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1704:01:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
1677:20:23, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1662:20:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1625:11:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
1608:21:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1584:18:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1571:18:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1557:18:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1540:18:11, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1523:17:55, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1508:14:21, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
1049:07:35, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
1023:20:09, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
1005:20:05, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
983:13:06, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
965:12:18, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
947:12:17, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
842:05:33, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
698:http://blurting-in.zkm.de
226:
135:
105:Contemporary Art articles
71:
46:
1921:they should be removed.
1856:Or this edit from 2008?
1274:Please do not modify it.
898:Please do not modify it.
866:. Please participate in
850:Redirects for discussion
288:The following Knowledge
1590:User:L'Origine du monde
1463:COI tag (February 2023)
1193:Centre Georges Pompidou
922:08:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
882:23:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
870:if you wish to do so.
868:the redirect discussion
669:External links modified
395:if the issue is urgent.
166:WikiProject Visual arts
2369:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2348:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2288:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2271:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2240:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2209:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2172:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2107:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2092:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
2000:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1992:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1965:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1942:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1895:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1862:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1847:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1828:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1770:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1716:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1672:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1620:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1579:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1566:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1552:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1535:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1503:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1477:Single Purpose Editors
1452:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1402:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1389:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1373:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
1262:♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
859:
501:one thing at a time.--
368:
28:This article is rated
1952:User:Star Mississippi
1709:User:Star Mississippi
858:
415:. Student editor(s):
375:, particularly those
367:
302:neutral point of view
1645:COI tag (March 2023)
758:regular verification
294:conflict of interest
240:WikiProject Coventry
189:visual arts articles
1096:See comment below.
748:After February 2018
727:parameter below to
2128:L'Origine du monde
2124:True and important
2016:L'Origine du monde
1743:L'Origine du monde
1687:L'Origine du monde
1468:L'Origine du monde
1301:Community Tech bot
860:
848:A&l listed at
802:InternetArchiveBot
753:InternetArchiveBot
678:Art & Language
653:Ethicoaestheticist
523:Ethicoaestheticist
503:Ethicoaestheticist
413:on the course page
369:
158:Visual arts portal
34:content assessment
1417:Original research
1367:Excessive detail:
1339:Excessive detail:
778:
632:
615:comment added by
592:comment added by
565:
548:comment added by
454:comment added by
399:
398:
358:
357:
276:
275:
272:
271:
268:
267:
260:Coventry articles
201:
200:
197:
196:
117:
116:
113:
112:
2441:
2407:
2402:
2383:
2382:
2370:
2349:
2289:
2272:
2241:
2210:
2173:
2150:
2148:
2143:
2108:
2093:
2012:Star Mississippi
2001:
1993:
1966:
1943:
1896:
1863:
1848:
1829:
1811:
1809:
1804:
1771:
1756:
1754:
1749:
1717:
1702:
1700:
1695:
1673:
1621:
1580:
1567:
1553:
1536:
1504:
1453:
1403:
1390:
1374:
1263:
900:
812:
803:
776:
775:
754:
742:
631:
609:
604:
564:
542:
466:
439:
410:
381:strongly advised
360:
285:
284:
278:
262:
261:
258:
255:
252:
235:
228:
227:
222:
210:
203:
191:
190:
187:
184:
181:
160:
155:
154:
144:
137:
136:
126:
119:
107:
106:
103:
100:
97:
96:Contemporary Art
80:
73:
72:
67:
59:Contemporary Art
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
2449:
2448:
2444:
2443:
2442:
2440:
2439:
2438:
2414:
2413:
2412:
2411:
2410:
2403:
2399:
2380:
2379:
2368:
2347:
2287:
2270:
2239:
2208:
2171:
2146:
2141:
2139:
2106:
2091:
1999:
1991:
1986:
1964:
1941:
1894:
1861:
1846:
1827:
1807:
1802:
1800:
1769:
1752:
1747:
1745:
1715:
1698:
1693:
1691:
1671:
1647:
1619:
1578:
1565:
1551:
1534:
1502:
1465:
1451:
1419:
1401:
1388:
1372:
1316:
1297:nomination page
1283:
1278:
1277:
1261:
1257:
929:
896:
889:
873:
853:
821:
806:
801:
769:
762:have permission
752:
736:
686:this simple FaQ
671:
610:
587:
543:
538:
519:
449:
445:
422:
404:
282:
259:
256:
253:
250:
249:
216:
188:
185:
182:
179:
178:
156:
149:
104:
101:
98:
95:
94:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
2447:
2445:
2437:
2436:
2431:
2426:
2416:
2415:
2409:
2408:
2396:
2395:
2391:
2356:
2355:
2316:
2315:
2314:
2313:
2312:
2311:
2310:
2309:
2308:
2307:
2306:
2305:
2304:
2303:
2302:
2301:
2300:
2299:
2298:
2297:
2296:
2295:
2166:
2165:
2164:
2163:
2162:
2161:
2160:
2159:
2116:
2115:
2114:
2067:
2065:
2064:
2063:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2037:
2036:
2035:
2028:
2027:
2026:
2019:
1985:
1982:Lisson Gallery
1978:
1977:
1976:
1975:
1974:
1973:
1972:
1906:
1888:
1887:
1886:
1885:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1869:
1679:
1646:
1643:
1642:
1641:
1640:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1634:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1593:
1464:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1418:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1364:
1315:
1312:
1293:
1292:
1282:
1279:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1245:
1228:
1218:Suavemarimagno
1211:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1164:
1163:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1090:
1089:
1067:
1066:
1051:
1026:
1025:
1008:
1007:
986:
985:
968:
967:
928:
927:
926:
925:
924:
891:
890:
888:
887:Merge proposal
885:
871:
852:
846:
845:
844:
826:
825:
820:
817:
796:
795:
788:
721:
720:
712:Added archive
710:
702:Added archive
700:
692:Added archive
670:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
583:
582:
537:
534:
518:
515:
514:
513:
497:
496:
444:
441:
403:
400:
397:
396:
370:
356:
355:
354:
353:
337:
321:
286:
274:
273:
270:
269:
266:
265:
263:
236:
224:
223:
211:
199:
198:
195:
194:
192:
175:the discussion
162:
161:
145:
133:
132:
127:
115:
114:
111:
110:
108:
81:
69:
68:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2446:
2435:
2432:
2430:
2427:
2425:
2422:
2421:
2419:
2406:
2401:
2398:
2394:
2390:
2389:
2386:
2384:
2376:
2371:
2365:
2360:
2354:
2351:
2350:
2344:
2340:
2339:
2338:
2337:
2333:
2329:
2325:
2321:
2294:
2291:
2290:
2283:
2281:
2280:
2279:
2278:
2277:
2274:
2273:
2265:
2264:Theroadislong
2262:
2261:
2260:
2256:
2252:
2251:Theroadislong
2248:
2247:
2246:
2243:
2242:
2234:
2233:Theroadislong
2231:
2230:
2229:
2225:
2221:
2220:Theroadislong
2217:
2216:
2215:
2212:
2211:
2204:
2203:Theroadislong
2201:
2200:
2199:
2195:
2191:
2190:Theroadislong
2187:
2186:
2185:
2184:
2183:
2182:
2181:
2180:
2179:
2178:
2175:
2174:
2157:
2156:
2155:
2154:
2153:
2149:
2144:
2137:
2136:Theroadislong
2133:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2117:
2113:
2110:
2109:
2102:
2100:
2099:
2098:
2095:
2094:
2086:
2083:
2082:
2081:
2077:
2073:
2068:
2066:
2061:
2058:
2054:
2053:
2052:
2047:
2044:
2040:
2039:
2038:
2034:
2031:
2030:
2029:
2025:
2022:
2021:
2020:
2017:
2013:
2009:
2008:
2007:
2006:
2003:
2002:
1995:
1994:
1983:
1979:
1971:
1968:
1967:
1960:
1956:
1953:
1950:
1949:
1948:
1945:
1944:
1937:
1934:
1933:
1932:
1928:
1924:
1919:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1904:
1903:
1902:
1901:
1898:
1897:
1868:
1865:
1864:
1858:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1850:
1849:
1842:
1840:
1839:
1838:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1834:
1831:
1830:
1823:
1819:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1810:
1805:
1798:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1773:
1772:
1766:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1755:
1750:
1744:
1740:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1724:
1723:
1722:
1719:
1718:
1710:
1707:
1706:
1705:
1701:
1696:
1688:
1684:
1680:
1678:
1675:
1674:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1659:
1655:
1651:
1644:
1626:
1623:
1622:
1614:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1605:
1601:
1598:
1594:
1591:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1582:
1581:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1569:
1568:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1555:
1554:
1546:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1538:
1537:
1529:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1520:
1516:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1506:
1505:
1497:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1487:
1483:
1478:
1474:
1469:
1462:
1458:
1455:
1454:
1446:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1436:
1432:
1428:
1424:
1416:
1408:
1405:
1404:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1392:
1391:
1384:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1376:
1375:
1368:
1365:
1361:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1342:
1340:
1336:
1334:
1330:
1327:
1323:
1320:
1313:
1311:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1291:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1280:
1275:
1268:
1265:
1264:
1255:
1249:
1246:
1244:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1212:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1201:Philippe49730
1198:
1194:
1190:
1187:
1186:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1151:
1149:
1145:
1142:
1141:
1124:
1120:
1116:
1115:Philippe49730
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1092:
1091:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1056:Philippe49730
1052:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1033:Coen brothers
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1006:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
989:
988:
987:
984:
980:
976:
972:
971:
970:
969:
966:
962:
958:
954:
951:
950:
949:
948:
944:
940:
936:
935:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
906:
905:
902:
899:
893:
892:
886:
884:
883:
880:
879:
878:
869:
865:
857:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
831:
830:
829:
823:
822:
818:
816:
815:
810:
805:
804:
793:
789:
786:
782:
781:
780:
773:
767:
763:
759:
755:
749:
744:
740:
734:
730:
726:
719:
715:
711:
709:
705:
701:
699:
695:
691:
690:
689:
687:
683:
679:
674:
668:
662:
658:
654:
650:
649:
648:
644:
640:
635:
634:
633:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
605:
603:
599:
595:
591:
581:
577:
573:
568:
567:
566:
563:
559:
555:
551:
547:
535:
533:
532:
528:
524:
516:
512:
508:
504:
499:
498:
495:
491:
487:
483:
482:
481:
480:
476:
472:
467:
465:
461:
457:
453:
442:
440:
438:
434:
430:
426:
420:
418:
414:
409:
401:
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
374:
371:
366:
362:
361:
351:
348:
345:
341:
340:Philippe49730
338:
335:
332:
329:
325:
322:
319:
316:
313:
309:
306:
305:
303:
299:
298:autobiography
295:
291:
287:
280:
279:
264:
247:
246:
241:
237:
234:
230:
229:
225:
220:
215:
212:
209:
205:
193:
176:
172:
168:
167:
159:
153:
148:
146:
143:
139:
138:
134:
131:
128:
125:
121:
109:
92:
91:
86:
82:
79:
75:
74:
70:
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
2400:
2392:
2375:WP:CONSENSUS
2358:
2357:
2345:
2323:
2319:
2317:
2285:
2268:
2237:
2206:
2169:
2167:
2104:
2089:
1997:
1989:
1987:
1962:
1939:
1917:
1909:
1892:
1889:
1859:
1844:
1825:
1767:
1713:
1669:
1649:
1648:
1617:
1576:
1563:
1549:
1532:
1500:
1466:
1449:
1420:
1399:
1386:
1370:
1366:
1343:
1338:
1337:
1332:
1331:
1325:
1324:
1321:
1317:
1294:
1284:
1273:
1259:
1254:Art-Language
1247:
1230:
1213:
1188:
1147:
1146:
1143:
1093:
1074:
1036:
952:
934:Art-Language
932:
930:
909:
903:
897:
894:
876:
875:
861:
827:
800:
797:
772:source check
751:
745:
732:
728:
724:
722:
675:
672:
611:— Preceding
606:
594:86.164.71.15
584:
539:
520:
468:
446:
421:
405:
380:
377:representing
372:
346:
330:
314:
289:
243:
164:
88:
40:WikiProjects
2147:Mississippi
2043:User:JLJL01
1891:referenced.
1808:Mississippi
1753:Mississippi
1699:Mississippi
1054:example).--
834:TheTrashMan
739:Sourcecheck
588:—Preceding
544:—Preceding
456:92.9.233.89
450:—Preceding
180:Visual arts
171:visual arts
130:Visual arts
2418:Categories
2393:References
2364:Netherzone
2328:Netherzone
2120:Netherzone
2085:Netherzone
2072:Netherzone
1936:Netherzone
1923:Netherzone
1727:Netherzone
1683:Netherzone
1654:Netherzone
1613:Netherzone
1600:Netherzone
1545:Netherzone
1528:Netherzone
1515:Netherzone
1496:Netherzone
1482:Netherzone
1445:Netherzone
1431:Netherzone
1383:Netherzone
1360:Netherzone
1346:Netherzone
1172:Netherzone
1153:Netherzone
1098:Netherzone
1079:Randykitty
1041:Randykitty
1015:Randy Kryn
997:Randy Kryn
993:Randykitty
975:Randykitty
957:Randy Kryn
939:Randykitty
819:Formatting
809:Report bug
550:Dgpjlggvtp
393:contact us
387:. You may
1235:Phlegetha
792:this tool
785:this tool
1739:did here
1729:removed
877:Rosguill
872:signed,
798:Cheers.—
639:Syrthiss
625:contribs
617:Blanchot
613:unsigned
590:unsigned
572:Syrthiss
558:contribs
546:unsigned
486:Syrthiss
471:Syrthiss
452:unsigned
443:Untitled
429:PrimeBOT
350:contribs
334:contribs
318:contribs
251:Coventry
245:inactive
219:inactive
214:Coventry
90:inactive
64:inactive
2359:Comment
2132:WP:IDHT
2057:LGL2022
1785:WP:ELNO
1427:WP:NPOV
914:Klbrain
864:A&l
725:checked
682:my edit
536:give up
308:LGL2022
30:C-class
1910:Again,
1797:WP:UPE
1793:WP:COI
1248:Oppose
1231:Oppose
1214:Oppose
1189:Oppose
1148:Oppose
953:Oppose
733:failed
417:Lacyew
324:JLJL01
300:, and
36:scale.
2381:Ppt91
2014:and @
1918:would
1548:NPOV.
1423:WP:OR
1363:COIs?
1144:Merge
2332:talk
2255:talk
2224:talk
2194:talk
2142:Star
2076:talk
1927:talk
1914:WP:V
1803:Star
1748:Star
1731:here
1694:Star
1658:talk
1604:talk
1562:COI.
1519:talk
1486:talk
1435:talk
1350:talk
1326:COI:
1305:talk
1239:talk
1222:talk
1205:talk
1195:and
1176:talk
1157:talk
1119:talk
1102:talk
1083:talk
1060:talk
1045:talk
1037:must
1019:talk
1001:talk
979:talk
961:talk
943:talk
918:talk
838:talk
729:true
657:talk
643:talk
621:talk
598:talk
576:talk
554:talk
527:talk
507:talk
490:talk
475:talk
460:talk
433:talk
344:talk
328:talk
312:talk
2320:not
2236:to?
1787:),
1299:. —
1199:.--
991:Hi
910:not
908:To
766:RfC
743:).
731:or
716:to
706:to
696:to
427:by
304:.
2420::
2334:)
2257:)
2226:)
2196:)
2130:,
2078:)
1929:)
1795:,
1660:)
1606:)
1521:)
1488:)
1437:)
1352:)
1307:)
1241:)
1224:)
1207:)
1178:)
1159:)
1121:)
1104:)
1085:)
1062:)
1047:)
1021:)
1003:)
981:)
963:)
945:)
920:)
840:)
779:.
774:}}
770:{{
741:}}
737:{{
659:)
645:)
627:)
623:•
600:)
578:)
560:)
556:•
529:)
509:)
492:)
477:)
462:)
435:)
419:.
296:,
2362:@
2330:(
2253:(
2222:(
2192:(
2118:@
2103:]
2074:(
2010:@
1984:.
1925:(
1843:]
1791:(
1783:(
1656:(
1602:(
1517:(
1484:(
1433:(
1348:(
1303:(
1256:.
1237:(
1220:(
1203:(
1174:(
1155:(
1117:(
1100:(
1081:(
1058:(
1043:(
1017:(
999:(
977:(
959:(
941:(
916:(
836:(
811:)
807:(
794:.
787:.
655:(
641:(
619:(
596:(
574:(
552:(
525:(
505:(
488:(
473:(
458:(
431:(
352:)
347:·
342:(
336:)
331:·
326:(
320:)
315:·
310:(
248:.
221:)
217:(
93:.
66:)
62:(
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
