Talk:Robert Thwaites

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

The name of the man

Is this man's name not Robert Thwaites?? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1918529,00.html

Also, I'm not sure if this crime makes him notable enough to deserve an entry. See WP:BIO.

In Answer

Sorry about that! The Independent started off calling him Robert but then changed it to Rupert later on. I didn't notice! I started the piece quickly as I thought it was of great interest. I was going to research it better and add more but I had to leave my PC for about twenty minutes. In the meantime you guys came along!

I don't know how to change or delete the main title name. Can someone do it please - Change Rupert to Robert in the title.

I think it's of great interest as he duped a famous expert and if you're interested in art and art forgery it is very notable. It's not a great crime but they were allegedly (I haven't seen them) great forgeries.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article1619277.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1918529,00.html

I think he qualifies as: "Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events" and I think he passes both 100 years test rules from the art/forgery point of view not dumbed down popular view.

Robert Thwaites is a talented artist with exceptional painting skills born of the art school system in England. His case brings the debate over talented but poor artist and rich art dealers to the fore. When will creativity be appreciated in this country and the remuneration go to the artist/designer/maker rather than the mere merchandiser? He should stay on these pages purely for the debate that arises from his case and those of other artists recently in a similar plight. Art students are encouraged to study their peers and the 'greats'. Here we have a terrible contradiction that our education continually asks art students to contextualise their work with that of others. The pages of Wikipedia should recognise these dilemmas, rarely discussed generally but well known to the hidden, but extensive world of art education in the UK. His was a serious and foolhardy mistake and one which he would acknowledge as such. However the irony remains that it has taken this misdemeanor to bring his talent to the fore. Now he is to be the subject of a documentary. And it surely must be acknowledged that his two pastiches of Fitzgerald are actually better than the originals he sought to fasify. To some extent art education in England, acknowledged the world over for its high standards and levels of production has failed as it has educated the practitioner but not the population at large. There is little demand for original art in England and this is because we are a visually illiterate people known for our preference for cheap prints of the Haywain and mass produced ceramics from Ikea rather than a signed etching or the work of the craftsman potter. His case also brings to the fore the issue of appropriate punishment for surely it would have been better for him to serve his debt to society by using his skills in drawing and painting within a more appropriate environment than that of a prison.