Jump to content

Talk:Francis Bacon (artist)/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Copy and pasting

We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please send permission for release under a CC BY SA license to permissions-en@wikimedia.org per WP:CONSENT. Edit [1] from user:Donagher2004 appears to be copied from http://www.augustastylianougallery.com/Gallery/FrancisBacon/FrancisBacon.html. --Lucas559 (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Relevance of Margaret Thatcher

In what way is it relevant what Margaret Thatcher has to say about Bacon? Or am I unaware of the fact that she was a connoisseur on 20th century art (or a connoisseur on anything)? In any case, it looks quite absurd, especially in the introduction of the article. Why not a quote from a revered critic like Robert Hughes: This painter of buggery, sadism, dread and death-vomit has emerged as the toughest, the most implacable, lyric artist in late 20th-century England, perhaps in all the world." C.Gesualdo (talk) 22:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Death of Dyer - BBC documentary

In the 28 January 2017 BBC documentary Francis Bacon: A Brush with Violence [2], it was made perfectly clear in a first hand account by Terry Danziger-Miles, that Dyer's (apparent) suicide had occurred a full two days before it was anounced, through the "joint decision" of Valerie Beston (who had discovered Dyer's body) Bacon and the hotel manager. As biographer Mark Stevens pointed out, this failure to report the death was a crime. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I think this is quite a revelation, so I have added to the appropriate section. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Francis Bacon (artist). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:21, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francis Bacon (artist). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:06, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francis Bacon (artist). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

George Dyer (burglar)

The title George Dyer (burglar) is highly inappropriate. Yes, the relationship between Bacon and Dyer did start with a burglary, but surely we cannot dub George Dyer as a burglar forever... Just to quote our article that says..."although a much-repeated myth claims their acquaintance started during the younger man's burglary into the artist's apartment"... etc. I suggest we find an alternative to classify his entry in George Dyer disambiguation page rather than burglar. werldwayd (talk) 23:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Infobox

I see that this was added by User:Chrisaratea at 18:14, 21 November 2018‎. Is there an established consensus that there should be no info box here? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:07, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I was bold and added one 6 years ago [3] it wasn't appreciated. Theroadislong (talk) 20:27, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
So I see. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Furniture and rugs

Currently, there is no apparent reason to title the "Furniture and rugs" section this way. Inside this hefty, 5-paragraph section, there is no preponderance of "Furniture and rugs" content, just one passing mention of a commissioned desk (but no mention of any rugs). The section disjointedly details certain influences such as his father's death, reception of his work, a movie, and a book, while giving an overview of Bacon's movement and productivity in the period 1933-1943. Is there an explanation for the title of the section? It seems this section needs some cleanup and focus, and/or a section title redo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaEremita (talk • contribs) 07:04, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Battleship Potemkin

"In 1927 Bacon moved to Berlin, where he saw Fritz Lang's Metropolis and Sergei Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin.."

"In 1935 he saw Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin.."

I think it would be worth considering whether

a) one of these mentions of him viewing the film is spurious or excessive; or if not, whether perhaps b) considering both these and the further mention of Battleship Potemkin in the section 'The screaming mouth', there is just too much in the article about that film. Harfarhs (talk) 21:46, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Maybe just that he first saw it "first in 1927, and viewed it many times thereafter", or something link that. Ceoil (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Where's the infobox?

Is this another "Stanley Kubrick"?

---

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Stanley_Kubrick

You may not add an infobox to the article, as there is currently no consensus for one. Please see [1]. Everybody's all talked out about infoboxes, so no new infobox discussion or RfC may be started on this talkpage earlier than September 2021. However, editors are kindly urged to not scold anybody, especially new users, who do try to start a discussion. Please just explain nicely to them that we're not doing that now and point to this notice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllThatJazz2012 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

'Irish-born British'

Not only does this drivel, remain on an article purporting to be an encyclopedic, but the entire 'talk' section has been taken out. Censored. The section discussed an error in the main article, so should have been left in.

'Irish-born' British. No Idea what this means. This phrase has nothing to back it up. I am Norman, Angles, Celtic and Saxon, like most people in Ireland. Am I Irish born-British, French or German? To be consistent, you will have to rework every single Irish person born in Ireland, pre-1922. In fact, you are going to have to edit every single American's article as well. American born-Irish. American born-German. How long must you stay in a country to be classified as 'belonging' to that country. What percentage of DNA do you need, to be classified as part of another country or is it, 'race?'. What race defines a countries nationality? Shall we continue along with this nonsense?

This was crass editing at the time and remains so. Wikipedia strives to be an encyclopedia and not a tool for the 'genetics for dummies', practitioners. Otherwise, the articles will boil down to the nationality and bias of the editors. One enlightened editor actually started his/her argument with 'sigh'. One step away from LOL and OMG.

Stick to the verifiable facts:

' Francis Bacon was a figurative painter known for his bold, graphic and emotionally raw imagery. He was born in Ireland. His parents etc etc.

This avoids such nonsensical meanderings and is linked back to objective facts.

As a comparative example: Oscar Wilde.

Objective: He was a writer, who was born in Ireland. Subjective and meaningless: He was an 'Irish writer.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.44.149.144 (talk) 20:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Ethnicity is not reflected in the lead unless it is considered vitally important to the subjects notability. As Bacon did not consider himself Irish, and did not hold an Irish passport but a British one, it seems entirely erroneous to describe him as an "Irish" anything. He lived almost all of his life in Britain. These are facts. 60.255.0.19 (talk) 06:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Factually, it doesn't really matter what identity one considers oneself, but rather what their legal nationality is. In a times interview of 16th March 1991, Bacon told Richard Cork 'You mustn't forget that I was born in Ireland.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmcnamara (talk • contribs) 08:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
And the "entire Talk section" has not been "taken out". It has been archived, and the relevant section starts here. It goes on for about nine miles through fairly arid territory, so wear sturdy shoes and bring along plenty of water.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
And several other section in archive 1 return to the topic. Johnbod (talk) 21:24, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

As far as I can make out Francis Bacon was born of English parents, they left Ireland in 1924 & had British passports. He did not ever have Irish nationality. The Irish claim him as Irish but the BBC has always referred to him as British or English. The French have referred to him formally as English. In his interviews he said on several occasions that he was English but born in Ireland .Wool Bridge (talk) 21:15, 3 August 2018 (UTC) Here he explains that he is English born in Ireland: http://www.francis-bacon.com/chronology/#1910s#4 Wool Bridge (talk) 21:32, 3 August 2018 (UTC) The author Doris Lessing was born in Iran. No one refers to her as an Iranian writer, though she is on record as saying that she felt some affinity with the place of her birth. Maybe her Wikipedia entry should be changed though!Wool Bridge (talk) 21:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC) https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/2.732/should-bacon-be-labelled-irish-or-british-1.1252521

The page has been returned to the previously agreed "Irish-born British". You realize you are continuing a conversation from 2015? But changes had slipped in. Johnbod (talk) 10:37, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
ireland was part of the UK in 1909 so it would be impossible for him to have irish nationality as he left ireland before independence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.96.14.189 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
what a mess!!! Bacon was born in Ireland of an English Mother and a AUSTRALIAN father (all information is on Wikipedia)... His father was born in Australia being a son of a Australian mother and English father. That's the reason why Bacon doesn't say he is son of English parents, because he knew his father was not a Englishman. And he was evicted by his father from his Dublin house at the end of 1920s, when Ireland was already an independent country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lehol (talk • contribs) 01:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Currently, there unfortunately does not appear to be any consensus on the correct wording. The only factual and and 100% verifiable statement at the moment, is that he was born in Ireland, hence "Irish-born" is the only current irrefutable statement. All others such as "British" or even "Irish" are up for debate, and until there can be any agreement, as per Wikipedia's guidance on "Consensus" (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus), then only "Irish-born" is acceptable, as it is a factual statement in the description of Bacon and is not debatable. As other users have suggested, this statement should be an appropriate intro description, with the rest of the article and biography of his life speaking for itself. Let's please leave Irish and British nationalism behind, and avoid any "claims" a fan of one country may want to impose on another. The current trend of attempted British revisionism on Bacons page only comes off as apparent envy towards Ireland and their wealth of world renowned artists. Any previous or current attempts to impose "Irish" identity on this article are also at best only exacerbating any issues the British revisionists seem to have with Bacon being born in Ireland, and at worst are coming off as Irish nationalists themselves. We should only stick to facts and verifiable sources. Stop any edit wars and start a discussion here if you want to suggest an addition or change to the current "Irish-born". (User:92.24.246.53) 16:00, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

This Rfc produced a very clear consensus, after years of discussions. This will be maintained unless & until it changes, after another Rfc, which is pretty unlikely frankly. The facts are clear. Bacon was of course born in Ireland but never had an Irish passport (if you read that article it will become clearer why not), but had British ones. Nothing is "up for debate" (if you want that, try here) - you are just being a nuisance; please stop. Johnbod (talk) 17:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Stating that there is a consensus does not make one, and citing an almost 9 year old Talk article doesn't either. Please see https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus . "Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus. Should that edit later be revised by another editor without dispute, it can be assumed that a new consensus has been reached. In this way, the encyclopedia is gradually added to and improved over time." Myself and many others still object to nationalistic "British" or "Irish" claims. Neutrality and factuality are important here. Currently, the only factual statement is that Bacon was born in Ireland. There does not appear to be any debate here, nor have you provided anything to counter this statement. This will be maintained until you can provide evidence to the contrary. Your comment stating "...but he never had an Irish passport" is just daft. You may need to educate yourself on a few other famous examples of Irish people who may have never held an Irish passport, or some who never even existed in the Republic post-rising. Please see Oscar Wilde[1], W B Yeats[2], Bram Stoker[3], George Bernard Shaw[4], or James Joyce[5], all of whom are described as "Irish", never mind the compromise of "Irish-born" to try and please the more stubborn/nationalist/bigoted editors out there. Are these examples enough for you? Or do you feel strongly that they too should also should be changed to "Irish-born British"? I can imagine you may have attempted to change those also over the years, to no success.
Editing without supplying a reason is just petty edit warring. Use this discussion thread, try to give reasons and arguments and cite sources is you wish for the word "British" to also be used in the description. There may have briefly been consensus 9 years ago, but there clearly isn't any now, and there doesn't appear to have been any consensus throughout those 9 years. From Wikipedia's consensus page: "Decision making and reaching consensus involve an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns". The purpose of Wikipedia is to improve the information contained in articles over time. Wikipedia articles are always up for debate and change, in order to improve the quality of the article. You are not improving the article by stubbornly editing and reverting, and not engaging in the Talk page. Use this page, if you can come up with a reason to why simply having "Irish-born" as it is now is not appropriate, then please, give your reasons. This is what the Talk page is for. If it will make you feel any better then we can attempt to have a RfC if you feel passionately/patriotic enough about it all. Just please stop the edit wars and talk instead. 92.24.246.53 (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
"Dude, this thread is almost two years old. Do you really have nothing better to do? Get a grip" DuncanHill (talk) 20:04, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Oscar_Wilde
  2. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/W._B._Yeats
  3. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bram_Stoker
  4. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/George_Bernard_Shaw
  5. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/James_Joyce
Duncan, please use this as an opportunity to provide constructive feedback, rather than whatever that is. I agree with the users comments. Irish-born would currently seem to be the only objective statement to make. It's based on a fact. Anything else stated seems to just be an opinionated mess, on both sides, with no side providing any decent evidence to sufficiently back up their claims. The point made about other famous Irish artists referenced above seems valid, maybe we should look at how other debates have been settled, as the artists mentioned are very similar in their origin and life to Bacon, having been born in a pre-rising Ireland and spending a lot or the majority of their life in England also. Yet these appear to have been undisputedly agreed upon with regards to this "nationality" issue. 109.249.184.195 (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Would disagree with attempts by Johnbod, DuncanHill, and other IP users attempts to enforce their own views no matter how strong or weak their arguments were. Both sides appear to be guilty of edit warring.
One thing I do agree with is that the current consensus is very old, and possibly outdated as it does not appear to represent the majority of editors in this current discussion (not that majority constitutes a consensus). Upon my review of the RfC today, it may not have been decided appropriately (in my own opinion), or if I am incorrect and it was decided perfectly fine, then my second point to make would be that maybe it was not the correct form of outside input, and other alternatives to RfC should be considered in the future in order to attempt to form a more stable and widely accepted consensus than the current disputed one.
More importantly than any of my previous points, I think discussion is always paramount, and should always continue in order to ensure the most accurate articles are produced and maintained. I think a look into how other previously mentioned famous Irish artists pages (those that are currently stable and have maintained this stability for a long time) achieved a consensus, if it involved outside input etc, and what method of decision making input was used to achieve the stability that this page seems to unfortunately lack. I welcome everyones opinion on the issue. 213.205.241.157 (talk) 02:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes the 2012 Rfc is very stable (aka old), but if you look through the subsequent history of edits on the page you will see there are a large number of editors (far more than participated in the Rfc) ready to defend it by reverting people like you who blow in and change the article to their own preference. Your rambling points don't raise anything new that needs to be discussed. Johnbod (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi John. I think you may be getting confused. I have not edited this article yet.
My main point was that there does not appear to be any agreement currently or over the last number of years, and that the current opinions and points being made in these discussions do not seem to align with the 9 year old RfC, which upon review doesn't seem very strong or conclusive. A bit of a mess of everyone's opinions without much evidence to back up points, much like the current discussion.
There hasn't been any concrete points made about describing Bacon as "British" yet, as there hasn't for describing Bacon as "Irish", which is why I'm encouraging constructive discussion. So far all I've heard is "He's British!" or "He's Irish!". The only thing people have agreed on so far is his birthplace, yet even that fact seems to rile people up on both sides. 213.205.241.157 (talk) 14:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
If you've been listening, you and the other editor recently raising this will have seen several suggestions you (re-)read the vast amount on this topic in the archives. An rfc is a formal process for establishing consensus. Johnbod (talk) 15:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Quite so. I must say I object to being described as attempting to force my own view, other than my view that a change to this particular point needs to be established by a prior consensus on this page. I also don't think anyone is riled up by mentioning his birthplace. If someone wants to change the established wording then they should start a new RfC. DuncanHill (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

"Irish-born British" RfC

I agree that the description is nonsensical, but only because it is quite confusing and implies that he was an Irishman who later emigrated to England. Francis Bacon was never an Irish citizen, and never possessed any citizenship other than that of the United Kingdom. He simply happened to be born in Dublin to his British parents. Neither his parents nor he considered themselves in any way Irish. The description can be easily compared to Wikipedia's treatment of John Singer Sargent, who was born in Florence. Wikipedia does not describe him as 'Italian-born American artist'. A simple solution would be 'British artist/painter born in Dublin, Ireland'. That exactly contains the different perspectives that seem to be held on this talk page!


The description is nonsensical, as is a separate thread dealing with this ("Nobody would call Doris Lessing Iranian because she was born in Iran") etc. If Bacon was born in Ireland, he was Irish by birth, irrespective of parentage. The Ernest Shackleton entry went through precisely the same problems before an RfC for concensus. The conclusion reached was that by virtue of his birth in Ireland, Shackleton was Irish (it helps that Shackleton himself frequently made this claim). Can I suggest something along the lines of "was an Irish-born artist who spent most of his career in Britain" or whatever. But "Irish-born British" has to go. Hanoi Road (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Have you read the RfC to which you appear to be referring? Or are you calling for an RfC, but are unaware of the prior one? You might also care to peruse Archive 1 of this talk page, about half of which is taken up with a heated discussion of this point.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 20:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Hadn't seen that. Am requesting an RfC based on the 'Shackleton Precedent', for want of a better description. The wording here is wrong. That much is clear. It needs to be tidied up. There is no such thing as an "Irish-born British person". Call him British and have done with it. Hanoi Road (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Or "was a British artist". Then somewhere in the lede explain the circumstance of his birth in Dublin and early departure from Ireland. Surely that solves the problem. Option B. is to simply describe him as "Irish born" and let the rest of the article speak for itself. Hanoi Road (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
@Hanoi Road: I would remind you not to log out to edit. DuncanHill (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
"There is no such thing as an "Irish-born British person"" - one imagines the Duke of Wellington would disagree, and I know for a fact that there are many Irish-born people nowadays who are also British. You have a history of bad faith and disruption in these issues and I think it would be best if you a) stopped editing while logged-out, and b) actually withdrew from the issue. Your behaviour on Shackleton was atrocious. DuncanHill (talk) 19:46, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Dude, this thread is almost a year old. Do you really have nothing better to do? Get a grip. Hanoi Road (talk) 19:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I hadn't noticed that instead of starting a new thread at the bottom of the page today as you should have done you had instead commented in one that was two years old at the top. DuncanHill (talk) 20:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hmmm. Seems to be a slight "overlap of interest" here with the WP:SPA anon TalkTalk IP editor from Edinburgh? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Same person, same problem indenting, same rhetorical approach, same dishonest edit-summaries, same anti-British sentiment. Caused a lot of disruption on Ernest Shackleton. DuncanHill (talk) 20:19, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
God, how tedious you are. Same person. Same (baseless) assumptions. Same fetish for "indentation". Same troll-like tendency to exhume dead issues.
Same bore.
Get a hobby. And I don't mean this. Hanoi Road (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hanoi Road, don't you think that what you just wrote looks very much like a personal attack against another editor? Perhaps you'd like to strike it out or remove it? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
As an Irishman myself, I can understand Hanoi's frustration, and the "personal attack" is small beans, though if you could cool it Hanoi, that would be nice. I admit I also first came to this page, back in 2005, wanting to right great wrongs, but the fact of the matter is that he was born in Kildare to a recently arrived British couple. And he got the hell out of there for Berlin as soon as he could, and never returned to IRL. Although his descendants would now be welcome to join the current Irish soccer team, his "irishness" is a technicality, and in no way reflects his blood or heritage. So support current wording. Ceoil (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Ceoil. No issues with this. Just dislike being relentlessly pursued by Trolls. And he is one. Hill is a guy who self-importantly stated on the Shackleton issue (and I quote) "I want as little to do with you as possible". However, like all closet stalkers, he can't get enough of me. 😀

An tuiginn tú? Hanoi Road (talk) 23:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Tuigim, but best way to loose heat is not be so abrasive in argument. I see a lot of your contributions to articles are very good, but you are a bit excitable on talk pages...that invites bite back, here as in real life. Maybe choose and approach your battles more carefully, rather than nihilistly insult all and sundry. Also, you have few edits yet, so contribute more to build up credibility before taking on old hands like Duncan. Again, that's how it works in real life also...gotta pay your dues. Anyways, talk later...if you cop on and don't get blocked, ha ha. Ceoil (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm not certain that being an "old hand" builds up "greater credibility". This isn't the Princeton faculty lounge where we know who won a Nobel and who didn't. It's a collaborative project run by anonymous volunteers. The fact that you've been "at it" - so to speak - for longer than someone else isn't exactly a recommendation. PS: I've been blocked before. Water off a duck's back. Hanoi Road (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Wow. So much arguing with little of anything being said other than "my perspective is Y and I disagree with X". Irish-born British wins on a technicality then? Should something be placed at the top of the talk page? (Oh well, at least you aren't some "Irish" American telling me I'm wrong to disregard the 1/16th Irish ancestry of my mixed-race children...lol). --Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 20:19, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Infobox

Consensus is against the inclusion of an infobox. An infobox should not be added to this article without consensus for one. Jip Orlando (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The infobox I had added back in April [4] has been removed in early September by Jip Orlando [5] on procedural grounds. So here I am: is there consensus for the reintroduction of the infobox? What are the arguments against its introduction? JBchrch talk 03:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, JBchrch for the ping. For anyone else reading, the editnote requiring discussion of an infobox was added here: [6], with the edsum: remove infobox added with no discussion recently. What a surprise that this has caused edit-warring! There is an inconclusive discussion in talk archive 1, but a consensus is needed. Bound to be problematic here. There appears to be no current consensus either for or against an infobox. The tangential discussion I referenced in my edsum took place briefly in Archive 2. Also, per this: [7], infoboxes are neither required nor prohibited. So, here are my thoughts on an infobox for this article:
  • Oppose - comparing the current revision: [8] to the most recent one with an infobox: [9]:
  1. An infobox shrinks the image too much. The px parameter can be modified, but I think that doing so makes the infobox intrusive into the text.
  2. Duplication of info- His born and death dates are in the lead, along with his notable work.
  3. The controversy over "British" versus "Irish-born British." "British," in the previous infobox, had redirected to British Nationality Law, which has nothing in it regarding "Irish-born British." This is a dangerous omission based on the controversy that litters the talk page and its archives.
  4. Lack of nuance- his style is identified as Figurative art and the movement as Abstract Expressionism. But his output encompassed more than a single style and movement. As the lead says: "His output can be broadly described as sequences or variations on single motifs; including the 1930s Picasso-influenced bio-morphs... the 1950s 'screaming popes' ... and the cooler, more technical 1980s paintings."
This final argument is most important in my opinion- we shouldn't do the reader a disservice by presenting things as a list that have better nuance written as prose. Jip Orlando (talk) 14:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose - per above and before. We have enough trouble with the first line - a box would only increase this. Johnbod (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Support, as proposer. An infobox serves readers. It allows them to immediately identify the relevant time period, the relevant geographic area, the relevant medium, and other relevant information that allows them, in a few seconds, to know who the subject is. Changes to the content of the infobox can be made, discussions can take place and consensus can be met, so the argument that "my" infobox was wrong (which I'm happy to accept) is not really a good argument again the introduction of an infobox at all. I would also like to point out that pretty much all the articles about 20th-century painters have an infobox: Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Cy Twombly, Marc Chagall, Willem de Kooning, Mark Rothko, Amedeo Modigliani, Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol, Jean-Michel Basquiat, David Hockney, Robert Rauschenberg... Is there anything specific to Bacon such that an infobox could not be created? Finally, regarding the Irish/English controversy, I note that at least two editors who have been involved in this controversy have been blocked indefinitely[a], so it's not like this debate involved constructive, good-faith editors in good standing. It was just one example of the project-wide, longstanding edit-warring between different nationalisms. This should not distract us from our primary function, which is to serve readers. JBchrch talk 14:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose per discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Pointing to the existence of IBs in other articles is a WP:OTHERCONTENT argument that has no force against local consensus. Nationality disputes are among the most intractable and I doubt that we've seen the last of this one despite any user blocks. Agree with Jip Orlando. Ewulp (talk) 04:21, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
WP:AADP is rarely useful as an essay, because you can extract pretty much anything from it. In this particular case, the section you cited states While these comparisons are not a conclusive test, they may form part of a cogent argument; an entire comment should not be dismissed because it includes a comparative statement like this. Besides, there is no prior consensus: we are forming the consensus right now. JBchrch talk 14:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose, as somebody that is not opposed to infoboxes per se,[10] but Bacon is singularly unsuited to categorisation, and say this having been married to a librarian who spent 10 years documenting and categorising artifacts, so understand the urge. But...for eg describing him as an Abstract Expressionist is way off the mark / cringe worthy and a good eg of the issues likely to be brought up in this case (he was not part of any movement, and conversely there is no "school of Bacon"), to say nothing of the torture that a one/two word infobox description of his nationality would reign down on this page, for years and years. Ceoil (talk) 01:33, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Notes

  1. ^ Hanoi Road (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log), FreddysDead (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Additional sources

This entire journal issue is devoted to [this particular] Francis Bacon, with 7 articles & 3 reviews:

  • Visual Culture in Britain, vol. 10, no. 3 (2009) [11], URL access: subscription (to get more than abstracts).

 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:20, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Francis_Bacon_(artist)/Archive_2&oldid=1235852962"