Jump to content

Talk:Georgia O'Keeffe/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Possible New Outline

Hi fellow Wikipedians!

I am a fellow intern at the Georgia O'Keeffe Museum. I have been task with creating pages of those in her circle that do not have one. However, I have noticed, like some on this talk page that this page could use some improvement. There is a lot of great info on here, but it can be more organized and concise so it does not overwhelm the reader. I myself am asking how to frame such information and created a solid outline. Any suggestions and help will be much appreciated!

Outline

Intro - Possibly only 2 paragraphs long, the intro dives into her bio which gets repeated later on, I think this can be edited to more of a summary.

Early Life

Education and Early Career

Career (These titles can be/should be workshopped)

    -Move to New York, Flowers & Sky Scrapers 1918-1929 
    -Brief Hiatus, Visits to New Mexico, Landscapes 1930-1949 
    -Permanent Move to New Mexico, Above Clouds I  1950-1969 
    -Pottery work, Career End  1970-1986 

Awards & Honors

Legacy

Personal Life

    -Marriage  (Details of marriage how it relates to her work and how it affected her,                               maybe also how she handled Steiglitz's estate and work)
    -Abiquiu & Ghost Ranch ?
    -Travel 
    -Decline in Health 

Paintings

Notes: In the early thirties she did struggle with mental health due to certain factors in her life, I do think this should be included I am not sure if it needs its own paragraph, but instead intertwined with other sections since it did affect her work and future decisions.

Also, the Affairs paragraph seems unnecessary especially since there is only confirmed proof that Stieglitz was the one that had extramarital affairs. The first paragraph states her and Frida had an affair, but the rest of the paragraphs are speculation. However, I would like to include O'Keeffe's relationships(not necessarily romantic) with other artist, like interactions with Frida, Warhol, etc. Maybe in legacy?

I also am not sure if "flowers as vulvas needs its own paragraph, since she rejected that theory, however it should definitely be mentioned. I am wondering if Flowers, Sky Scrapers, Landscapes, should have its own paragraph. I know a couple of of the works have their own page, but not sure if it is necessary, we can include that info in her main page instead.

This outline is not perfect but it can be a start to improve the page. Interested to here feedback. Thanks!! Orangesky6791 (talk) 21:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I just realized that there's good / helpful content here, so I'll respond to that and see what you and others think:
  • Maybe "Mental health" and part of "Hospitalization" could be combined?  DoneCaroleHenson (talk) 00:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Break out the recuperation, visits, etc. into another subsection  Done Put visits info into "Relationship"–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
  • I changed "Affairs" to "Relationships"... and the content can be summarized and expanded where helpful, perhaps picking up some of the friendship themes under Hospitalization
  • I changed the Vulvas\criticism to just Criticism, a common and really essential section for an artist of note whose work was trend-setting. For a criticism section, the key point is to summarzie the key theories
  • Regarding I am wondering if Flowers, Sky Scrapers, Landscapes, should have its own paragraph. I know a couple of of the works have their own page, but not sure if it is necessary, we can include that info in her main page instead. I am not sure what you mean. I know you say "paragraph", but my mind keeps going to images. If it's about the Paintings section, images can be grouped like they are in Ukiyo-e. For instance, see Ukiyo-e#Late flowering: flora, fauna, and landscapes (19th century). There a several ways to go about grouping images, with the biggest variation being between the use of {{Multiple images}} templates or Gallery formats that float a bit depending upon how much the user zooms in and out of the page. I hope that makes sense. If it's about just breaking large paragraphs into separate paragraphs, that's easy.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)


Comments and changes to try out

Orangesky6791, Thanks for your interest in the Georgia O'Keeffe article! There are a number of things here, so I'll take them one at a time:
  • The intro is similar to what is written for WP:Good articles - giving the reader a really good overview. If a given reader would rather dive right into the content, they can go to the relevant section. IMO, it is good to have a thorough intro for a long article. It would be good to hear, though, from other users about whether it should be trimmed down as well.
  • My initial take is that some of the suggested headings are kind of long... and some are not in the standard sequence. For instance, Legacy is usually at the end of the section about her life and career.
  • I made the change to the "Education and early career" heading, pulling it out of Career - as you suggested
  • I pulled the "Criticism" and "Awards and honors" - so no longer subsections of Career - as you suggested
  • The remaining subsections under Career need a bit more work, because it's not going to be as easy as just adding the years to the headings - and the headings will a bit wordy to add the suggested changes
  • I moved "Career end" content to a new Career subsection "Later years" (could be last, end, etc.)
  • Combined "Death" and "Estate settlement" into "Death and estate settlement" (without the Career end info) under "Personal life"
If you are good with those changes, the only headings to work out are, placement of:
  • Paintings
  • Legacy
  • Publications
  • The subsections under "Personal life"
As a kind of disclaimer, I am making really easy changes for suggestions that I agree with and my suggested handling of end career, death, estate settlement, which involved movement of text. The headings can be changed easily - hopefully with discussion on this talk page.
Right now the Table of contents (aka outline) is:
Contents
CaroleHenson (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Updated some heading changes.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:54, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Fixed outline for proper line feeds and broke out "Comments and changes to try out" - get a start on the low-hanging fruit.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
CaroleHenson This is a great start! First on the COI, since there is a conflict, I want to state that I will not be directly editing on this page. Any edits will be on the talk page, and I will leave it up to you and other editors to add it, or at the very least discuss and make changes.
For the intro I understand that an overview is important, but I do think it needs work since it mainly talks about her early career, and then the last sentence is how much a painting sold for, it just seems a bit random. But maybe this is one of the places we can start!
The career subsections do need work, but maybe we can start improving the content and then find a better title for them?
Like I said I will only be working on the talk page and I will include citations as well. (Orangesky6791 (talk) 23:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC))
(I indented this previous post to make it easier to read. See WP:TALKGAP.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Orangesky6791 Thanks for your feedback about how you anticipate working on Wikipedia, which is inline with Wikipedia's guidelines.
Regarding the intro, you comments make more sense to me. I see your point. If you'd like to take a stab at a draft for the intro, feel free. You can then submit it in it's own section / topic, using {{Request edit}}.
Regarding the career subsections, yes, it seems like that may need some conversation, and {{Request edit}} may be a good way to go. Another option is to start a draft or sandbox page for the Career section and work on that in an off-line manner.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Orangesky6791, A thought... Since it seems like you are most concerned about the verbiage in the Intro and Career sections. What do you think about working on that, and I'll work on the Personal life section, specifically about her health, hospitalization, career stuff in the Hospital section.
Then, tackle the new named Relationship section.
One thing to bear in mind... which I think you are likely already sensitive to... This is an encyclopedia artice that intends to pick up salient points about the subject's life and career in an objective manner, and not necessarily as she would talk about it if she were alive. That means avoiding peacock type of language and leaving in content that might be sensitive. Does that make sense?–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I went ahead and looked at the Hospitalization and Relationship sections and there were common sense fixes that need to occur. So, I pulled her post-recuperation work info out of "Hospitalization" and put it in "New Mexico" just after the mention of her having a nervous breakdown and taking a break from painting here. And, I put relationship/friendship information into the "Relationships" section here. So, that's done and flows better.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
CaroleHenson This all sounds great! Stay tune in the near future for the Intro and career edits.
Yes! This makes perfect sense and something I plan on actively keeping that in mind. My goal is not to hype up O'Keeffe or keep sensitive topics at bay. As I have been looking at O'Keeffe's page and other artists page (specifically those who are women,) I have just noticed the structure to be a bit disorienting, or information that is cited, but the citation does not include what was written, etc. I understand that this is difficult because there is so much information out there, especially about O'Keeffe, and its difficult to keep it organized.
There is also a lot of complex content, relationship with Steiglitz, criticisms on her work, etc. For example O'Keeffe rejected that the flower paintings depicted vulvas, so she personally might not want it on her page, however, that theory ties into a lot of criticisms she faced by male critics which was tied into this idea of "feminine art." On the other hand there are artists that were inspired by the idea that it had vulva symbolism. Because of that theory's impact, it probably should be on the page.
The point of that ramble is I just want to help make an accurate, clear page that can also highlight the complexities of her work and her life. I also am looking forward to hear everyone's input. (Orangesky6791 (talk) 00:10, 28 June 2023 (UTC))
(I indented this previous post to make it easier to read. See WP:TALKGAP. Please add one more colon than the previous post.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:29, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Orangesky6791, All great points! I like your intention and perspective!
If you need help starting a sandbox (see Wikipedia:Sandbox) for drafts (like bring across the code for citations, etc.), let me know. You can make changes you want in a sandbox, and then when it's finalized a user, perhaps me, can copy it into article space (with conversation about what is happening on the article talk page).–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:42, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Article improvement progress

Hi team! I realize the previous thread has now grown to 56 comments (a testament to our commitment!), so I thought a summary of progress could be useful.

Completed:
  • Initial reorganization with a new outline of sections and subsections in addition to date ranges Green tickY
  • Merged content throughout the article to improve flow and readability Green tickY
  • Most of the images grouped to better illustrate respective periods of O'Keeffe's work Green tickY
  • Article content

To do:

  • Divide section content up between editors to improve prose and tone, ensure WP:RS, update with recent research, fact-check
  • Rewrite the #Intro section, particularly thinning out or summarizing the early career information - paragraphs 1 is done, 2 is ready for feedback
  • Any changes to the Career subsections (e.g., dates in heading, content, comparison with other themes)? (Ppt91 taking on New York for now Ppt91talk 16:23, 3 July 2023 (UTC))
  • Changes to Reception section (should be revised and updated in regard to art historical scholarship)

This is what I have so far and we can use this as a separate post just for tracking. Feel free to add to the list if I am forgetting anything and mark as Green tickY for items that we have already completed. The next step of dividing up the sections will likely take us a while due to the amount of work involved, but the article already looks and reads much better, so I think we should be proud of the work accomplished over such a short period of time. :)

p.s. any new editors who come across these threads and are interested in joining the effort should feel free to do so at any point

Ppt91talk 15:24, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Really great idea, Ppt91! A couple of things, and I'm not sure where you are intending that they go, 1) here and below or 2) under the Completed / To do sections. Maybe don't update the lists until it's completed or added:

CaroleHenson (talk) 15:40, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Added "to do" items from #To do list items to add? based upon discussions in the above sections.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)