User talk:Ipigott/Archive 4

Langlois Bridge at Arles (Van Gogh series)

Thanks for the reminder about the review of Langlois Bridge at Arles (Van Gogh series). I went through and made some needed copy edits, tweaked images, used a uniform ref format, and used short refs for books. Is there anything else that you think needs to be done to get it ready? Thanks much!--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

It seems to be coming on very well.

 Done Personally I don't like the expression "At the time that..." if it simply means "when". Don't you think it would be more elegant to say, "Van Gogh was 35 when he made his paintings and drawings of the Langlois Bridge" or am I once again being too British?

 Done You also have a tendency to use "such as" all over the place. In some cases you could drop it altogether changing "...producing some of his best work,[1] such as sunflowers, fields, farmhouses and people of the Arles, Nîmes and Avignon areas" into "...producing some of his best work:[1] sunflowers, fields, farmhouses and people of the Arles, Nîmes and Avignon areas." In other cases you could consider using "including" or simply rewording completely. I suggest you scan through the article for the five instances you use "such as" and see how best to re-express them.

 Done You write "Fos, a sea port of Marseille". Perhaps that is what Fos-sur-Mer has now become but in the context of the article it would probably be sufficient to say that it was on the Mediterranean coast.

 Done I was also wondering whether you could expand on "He used fewer shades of colors, preferring multiple subtle color variations." It seems to me to be an important aspect of the paintings. If it is indeed a result of Japanese influences, it might be interesting to explore further.

You do not mention the buildings in "The Langlois Bridge at Arles with Road alongside the Canal". I seem to remember they are in fact part of the town of Arles. Perhaps you could check that out?

By and large though, you seem to have covered the topic pretty well. I hope the article's reviewer will agree. - Ipigott (talk) 21:09, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

All good catches. Yes, I'll see what I can find about the buildings in the Langlois Bridge painting you mentioned. GREAT POINT about "such as" -- my repetoir is pretty limited for that scenario! Ok, I have a few things to wrap up for the moment on the Taos article and then I'll tackle these. And, no your edit suggestion didn't sound too British.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I added "dones" next to all the items that are completed. Please let me know if you have any thoughts about the edits. I am still working on finding info about the buildings - I think that even though the setting looks remote, it was actually relatively short walking distance from the Yellow House and/or Old Hospital at Arles. But I stumbled upon that when working on other articles. I'll try and backtrack through other articles and see if I have better luck remembering the sources.--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your input and guidance on the Langlois Bridge article! It's passed as a GA article, in large part due to your edit suggestions / comments. Your suggestions especially made the article more polishes. Much appreciated!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations. It really looks good after all the additional work you did. Now that you are getting used to the GA procedure, I'm sure you'll be tempted to work more of your other articles up to the GA level. BTW, I still think it might be interesting to add a section on "Reception" at the end of the article, explaining that while there was little recogition of the value of his Langlois Bridge paintings during VG's lifetime, they have since become one of the most highly appreciated icons of his work. In 2003, one of the paintings was sold at Christie's (see here) for $8,295,500. If you click on the "Lot notes", you will see, for example, "These pictures are among the most celebrated and recognizable paintings from his sojourn in the South-- the fifteen months that van Gogh spent at Arles represent the pivotal moment in his career, in which he integrated the results of months of experimentation and produced some of his most renowned masterpieces. With their forceful palette and bold design, the Langlois Bridge pictures epitomize his mature style." And later: "These two watercolors were the first true glimpses that Theo had had of the kind of art his brother was producing in Arles, showing not only how important the Langlois Bridge sequence was to the artist, but also how historically pivotal Le pont de Langlois à Arles is in its own right." It is also interesting that "The picture was formerly in the collection of Baron Rudolf von Simolin (1885-1945), a prominent patron of the arts in Germany at mid-century." Most of the description is taken from: Evert van Uitert, Louis van Tilborgh, Sjraar van Heugten, "Vincent van Gogh", Rijksmuseum Vincent van Gogh & Rijksmuseum Kröller-Müller, published by Arnoldo Mondadore Arte, 1990. pages 100-101. The ISBN number to the French edition is 90-6153-223-X. Apologies for bringing all of this to your attention at this late date but I did not want to upset you during the GA review. - Ipigott (talk) 09:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott, You bring up a very interesting aspect to the story about the Langlois Bridge - and it definitely sounds like it would be a great addition to the article! At the moment, I'm feeling pretty de-motivated in general. How about if we circle back around to this a bit later?--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the point about the artist colony earlier - I added a comment under the Skagen section, too.--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to hear you are feeling demotivated. Didn't the GA do anything to renew your confidence in your Van Gogh coverage? Anyway, there's no rush but if you don't feel up to putting something together in the next week or so, I'll add something myself. Interesting comments on Skagen too. Did you see my comments on your Sien talk page? If you need help with uploading, let me know. - Ipigott (talk) 11:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I saw your comments on the Sien page - that note was added before I found out I could pull down images of paintings 1923 or earlier - and I figured out the upload program, which is MUCH easier with the upload wizard they have now. So, I'm good with uploading images now, thanks. Absolutely the GA helps - and especially that it was a pretty manageable process.--CaroleHenson (talk) 12:05, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

We're recruiting art lovers!

Archives of American Art Wikimedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the Smithsonian Archives of American Art and I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about art to participate in furthering art coverage on Wikipedia. I am planning contests and projects that will allow you access, no matter where you live, to the world's largest collection of archives related to American art. Please sign up to participate here, and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 00:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Article expansion

Hi Ipigott! It seems to me that you had said something to me before about some sort of significace of articles that increase in size by a certain percentage - I think it came up in relation to Langlois Bridge. I don't know if that meant it was a candidate for a good article review, or something else. I've recently expanded Frank Weston Benson and The Guild of Boston Artists and it would be great if you could help me out with the significance of an increase in article size. If it means it could go through a review process, that would be great! It would be wonderful to get input on either/both articles. Thanks so much!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Will have a good look at these and get back to you later. - Ipigott (talk) 07:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I wasn't meaning to give you a "to do" - but appreciate your input!--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

On "The Guild", I think you need to be much stronger on third-party accounts and sources. Of particular interest would be how the association has been viewed in the local press (and perhaps beyond), what kind of critical assessments have been made of the painters' works and how inidivual members have (or have not) benefitted from the activities. I would also avoid stating verbatim the various forms of membership. It looks a bit as if you are advertising the club rather than providing an "encyclopedic" account. It may be better to describe the various forms of membership in running prose rather than in a table. I would also avoid giving the precise amounts for the various membership fees. This could be addressed under the External Links. These are all of course my personal opinions which might not be shared by others. - Ipigott (talk) 10:00, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

All of your comments make sense to me! I'll work on it in the a.m. Thanks so much for taking a look and doing some editing.--CaroleHenson (talk) 10:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Benson is coming along quite well but in my opinion needs substantially more work if you want to have it reviewed for GA. The current structuring of the article is rather confusing. There seem to be too many headings and sections, leading to quite a bit of repitition, some of which I have now removed. Benson's place as one of America's leading artists is perhaps not sufficiently clear. I also think the section on Impressionism needs more work, particularly in regard to his style. I see you draw heavily on Bedford's "The Sporting Art of Frank W. Benson" but she has also written a more comprehensive biography: "Frank W. Benson: American Impressionist". You will see there are also many additional details on her website, especially in her biography. I also see there is a huge amount of literature on Benson - just look at the LOC listing. I was interested to see that Benson had also illustrated some works. So there's plenty to work on here. Have fun! - Ipigott (talk) 15:16, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Again, all great points! I love the Library of Congress link. I made changes to the membership section of The Guild of Boston Artists - and will work on the other points to both articles over the comings days or so. Thanks so much for your input!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

There are two links I frequently use when researching background information for Wikipedia articles: the Library of Congress catalog and the European Library which performs a search through most of Europe's national libraries and networks. I see you have already worked quite a bit on the articles. I thought Early Women Artists at the Guild of Boston Artists provided lots of interesting details. Maybe it would also be useful to include a section on some of the more successful members: not just the founders but more recent and contemporary members. I also see there is room for lots more articles on New England painters! - Ipigott (talk) 07:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Ipigott I'll check them out! Yes, I've been picking away at it - and will keep picking away at the Guild article (3rd party input, impact to artists, local press).

Regarding the Frank Weston Benson article, how do you think I should approach the point about defining his place as a leading artist? What types of information would I be looking for? Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

How about this or this or this or this? - Ipigott (talk) 16:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow! Great! I'm taking a break, but when I come back I'll check this out. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Taos, Colorado, etc.

Hi Ipigott, We've not chatted in awhile. Thanks for your edits to several Taos and Colorado articles and the update to Frank Benson. I've not fogotten your ideas about expanding the Frank Benson article and hope to get to it some time soon.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:03, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Good to hear from you again, Carole. I've been avidly following all the interesting work you've been doing. Pity you and many of the others interested in Van Gogh have been spending so much time in non-productive disputes on your talk pages rather than working on improvements to the article. I must say, I have never experienced such feelings of "possessiveness" about an article in all the years I've been contributing to Wikipedia. The net result seems to be that everyone has now decided to avoid further constructive work on the article. What a shame - especially when you all have so much to offer. I can only hope that we will see a more positive spirit of cooperation emerging in the not too distant future. - Ipigott (talk) 19:38, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, we shall see how things go. For a time I have plenty to keep me busy - and I've saved all your links for the Frank Benson article so that I can refer to them as I work on his biography article. Thanks again!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:36, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Shanghai vs. Chongqing

There is a RfC thread at Talk:Shanghai regarding the question whether Shanghai or Chongqing can claim to be the largest city in the PR China. However, this thread has not seen participation from anyone in more than 5 days, and there really needs to be more input. Since you raised a related question at Talk:Chongqing, you may wish to give your opinion on this matter. Thanks much—HXL's Roundtable and Record 01:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention to the discussion. It appears to me to be increasingly difficult to interpret Chinese data as a basis for "our" idea of a city. Perhaps this should be made more clear when dealing with Chinese population statistics. Similarly, the Chinese "municipality" certainly does not correspond to municipalities as we understand them in the west. Perhaps an article devoted to these problems would help to sort out some of the current disagreements and provide a better understanding of what the terms can cover. - Ipigott (talk) 10:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

The Teamwork Barnstar

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		To Kaldari, Ipigott, and WereSpielChequers: Thank you for helping make Wadsworth Jarrell a Good Article! I really appreciate the keen eye and contributions you made to improve the article. Much #wikilove to you all and I hope to work with you on another GA soon! SarahStierch (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Sarah, for your kind consideration. Of course, the real credit for the article goes to you. My contribution was microscopic compared to your careful research and reliance on the very best sources. Well done! - Ipigott (talk) 14:29, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Two in one week!

		Archives of American Art Barnstar
		This Barnstar is for your tireless contributions to Wikipedia related to the Archives of American Art. Thank you and I look forward to your continued contributions! SarahStierch (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again - you are certainly doling them out! Although you refer to the AoAA (on which I drew heavily), Seligmann is also a prominent European figure. I'm also working on equally interesting Germain but you don't need to continue the awards! - Ipigott (talk) 15:29, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Two Fischermen

Hi there, I just wanted to respond to you on a personal level regarding Talk:Olfert Fischer to let you know that I am weighing your remarks conscientiously and I appreciate your input. I also appreciate – greatly – your collegial tone, particularly if your surprise at my revision incorporated a certain amount of rancor (I imagine it probably did). I hope you'll believe it when I say I meant no disrespect to you by revising the article. I did put considerable thought into my own first response and I felt that a talkpage explanation upheld my obligation to discuss things. I can see that you're a very good editor, and after glancing at your contribution history I suspect our paths will likely overlap more in the future (and may have already in the past). We can definitely establish a good precedent for collaborative interaction now with Olfert Fischer. Please read my newest remarks and let me know what you think. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your additional explanations here. I find it counterproductive to initiate conflicts with other Wikipedians which is why I always try to be polite. See also my response on the article's talk page. You are certainly right we have some common interests and I look forward to future collaboration. - Ipigott (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad we're finding some common ground. Even if it turns out that Fischer was a complete fraud, it's been a pleasure disagreeing with you :) Thank you for your effort and patience. SteveStrummer (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Vincent van Gogh's death‎‎

Great work on this, I've enjoyed watching it develop. Ceoil 20:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Good to hear from you on this. I would really like to do quite a bit more on it but I am pretty tied up with all kinds of other things at the moment. One of the more immediate findings from looking through all the letters is that Van Gogh experienced a series of ups and downs right up to the time of his death. This is of course reflected in his paintings, bringing us back to the famous assertion in the VvG article "Those completed in the days before his suicide are considerably more dark." I think I will now change this to "Some of those completed shortly before his death reflect his deepening concerns. Referring to his paintings of wheatfields under troubled skies, he commented 'I did not have to go out of my way very much in order to try to express sadness and extreme loneliness'" I hope this keeps everyone happy. - Ipigott (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott - after the newest sock attack tonight I've decided to give up. I did pull some journal articles today, but this has become a huge waste of time and extremely demoralizing. I shouldn't have responded to your post on the talkpage - it opened me up to more disparagement and I'm very tired of it. I'm leaving this to you, Ceoil, Modernist, whoever wants to work on it. Good luck with it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Hope very much this is a temporary decision - and sorry if I unintentially added to your concerns. You've been making valuable contributions to VvG and I hope this will continue. If not, I'll keep following your work on other interesting articles such as Olivia Shakespear. You shouldn't take things so seriously. Wikipedia should be fun! - Ipigott (talk) 09:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Pantomime Theatre

I notice you had started working on an article about the Pantomime Theatre possibly without noticing that there is one already and then discovered it after a while. If that is the case, I just want to say that you are more than welcome to replace the current article with one of your own creation. It will only please me to see it get a better article than the one I have made. And remember that this goes for all articles of my creation, all are merely to be considered as place holders, always feel free to replace them entirely or re-structure or re-write to whatever extend you might find relevant – if my efforts end up keeping the subject from getting better coverage it would be such a shame. And I pretty much have this nagging wish to return to pretty much all of my previous articles anyway to try to improve and expand them so it would just save me some worries.

Now that I am disturbing your talk page anyway, I have a question related to the Nyhavn article which is another one out of the 'oh this deserves so much better' category. This source applies the term 'heritage harbour' for a sort of open-air museum for old ships. I thought the generic term could deserve an article but surprisingly it doesn't seem to be used anywhere else and I can find no info at all (neither under alternative names). So is it something you happen to know anything about? From the source it also appears that there are quite a lot of such places out there but I haven't really had much luck in identifying them either.Ramblersen (talk) 02:19, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

You are absolutely right - I started to put something together on the Pantomine Theatre and then discovered your article which I thought was pretty good. I was however surprised to see that a large chunck of text seems to have been copied directly from the English article from the Tivoli site. This should of course be paraphrased to avoid copyright problems. In regard to "heritage harbour", I had not come across the term before but I see there is a country club in Florida called "Heritage Harbor" (see here) and there are also other places which use the term in the USA. Hardly worth an article. - Ipigott (talk) 12:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I will look at the copyright issue with the Pantomime Theatre article as soon as I get the chance (on a bad internet connection and with little time right now) unless you have already made the necessary changes by then. As I recall it, it was one of the very first articles I created on Wikipedia and I may well have been very careless at that time ;probably meant to add changes later (didn't know about sandboxes then) and got distracted.The country clb was all I found too and that is of course not worth any coverage, I agree. Thanks for looking into it though.Ramblersen (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

A short break from Denmark (or Luxembourg)?

If you have a spare nine minutes, try this video. The article on its creator has, perhaps understandably, been written with more enthusiasm than scruple; I've started to tinker with it but on the off chance that the video interests (or for that matter even if it doesn't) you'd be welcome to join the effort.

As for me, I find "Blu" bracingly worthwhile after hours with self-promotional blather such as this. -- Hoary (talk) 00:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Not exactly my cup of tea but I'll have a closer look at it when I have time. -Ipigott (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

While the whole story is quite intriguing, I am not too keen on developing the article as so much of the content seems to originate here. Thanks anyway for drawing my attention to Blu's existence. - Ipigott (talk) 10:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh noes -- is the text from there? I don't notice it there, but I'm sleepy. If it is from there, I'll delete it. ¶ All right then, this is a very, very different non-Luxembourgeois excursion. Any input would be welcome, particularly during the next two to three weeks, when I shall be enjoying internet-free life within Советский Союз. -- Hoary (talk) 11:09, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I didn't mean the text had been copied from there, only that most of what is in the article seems to originate there. There are after all a number of other sources and some respectable literature. Enjoy your Russian holiday. - Ipigott (talk) 05:31, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Separate Skagen articles?

I think it would be worthwhile to create separate articles about Skagen Museum and the Michael and Anna Ancher House but I feel somewhat uncomfortable creating them since you have already written fairly substantial sections in other articles and I would therefore like to propose that you use these to create new pages just by copy-pasting what you have already written if you have no interest in elaborating on it right now. Separate articles will make sure that they pop up in the relevant categories and lists, save unnecessary repetitions (e. g. the Ancher House is relevant to both Anna and Michael Ancher), provide more specific articles to link to and more articles to distribute all the available good illustrations on, and in general simply highlight the subject more. And it will basically require no extra work. Well just a suggestion, if you prefer things to stay the way they are it is fine by me of course.Ramblersen (talk) 14:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

PS I don't know if you find it relevant but here is a possible illustration for the paragraphy about the "bondemalerstriden" in your article about the Funen Painters, I'll leave it to you to decide if it should be added or not.Ramblersen (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ramblersen once again for your constructive comments. Why don't you go ahead yourself and write articles on the museums? I could always touch them up once they are there. I am pretty short of time at the moment as we have family and friends staying with us for the next couple of weeks. In any case, my priorities are to expand the article on the Funen Painters and also to write up a few of the missing biographies. As for the cariacture, I think it would be more suitable in the Danish article - but a good find all the same. - Ipigott (talk) 14:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Would you happen to know anything about This picture? I have tried to find out what room it is and who executed the portraits on the wall but with no luck so far.Ramblersen (talk) 02:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this is the dining room at Brøndoms Hotel, now a central part of the museum. See the article Skagen Painters and in particular File:Brøndums Hotel 1891-92.jpg. It was transferred to the Skagen Museum in 1946. You can read more about the spisesal and the artists' portaits in the panel here. Thanks, by the way, for your work on Skagen. The articles are coming along quite well. Do you need any more help? - Ipigott (talk) 10:02, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks for the editorial contributions.

This user helped promote Wadsworth Jarrell to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Bagsværd Church

Hello Ipigott, thanks so much for the expansion of Bagsværd Church! I had very little time for editing this month, so tend to end up doing ridiculous stubs, on the assumption that are better than nothing and maybe somebody interested comes along and expands them. Therefore I am very glad it worked this time. --Elekhh (talk) 10:20, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

It was a pleasure expanding it a bit. Just let me know if you need any help in future. Good to see you are interested in Denmark again. - Ipigott (talk) 15:46, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Always interested in Denmark, and promoting it too, so here a DYK nomination again. --Elekhh (talk) 05:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I think I've just about completed my contributions here. Do you think we should include a box? I know our friend Ramblersen loves boxes on churches but maybe the images convey a better idea of the building. What do you think? - Ipigott (talk) 20:48, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Impressive work! By the size the article has now, an infobox would be ok, probably with the image of the interior. However I also like it as is with the two images together. --Elekhh (talk) 21:43, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Let's leave it as it is for the DYK. Perhaps we can do the box later. Personally I would have preferred the external view in the box with a larger image of the interior on the LH side in the body of the article. I've included the church in the Copenhagen churches template. - Ipigott (talk) 06:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

That could work as well. I started some minor improvements on the Jørn Utzon article. Is one of the top 1000 architecture articles, probably the most viewed Danish one. --Elekhh (talk) 06:58, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You are quite right about the Utzon article. It needs more careful attention. Perhaps I'll take a quick look at it myself. - Ipigott (talk) 07:16, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Great article the two of you have put together on this one. It has been on my to-do list for ages and now it has ended up with a much better article. To specify my view on infoboxes, I tend to look at countries with better coverage than Denmark enjoys (typically English articles since this is English wiki) and then follow whatever practice seems to be prevailing there. Therefore I routinely use infoboxes on articles about eg churches, architects and painters, since they tend to be used on even quite short articles, but not on articles about composers where they are not used even on long articles.I like consistancy. But I have not used them on the few articles I have made about churches around the country (Skagen, Nødebo) so I am not completely obsessed with those boxes. Well again, great job with the article!Ramblersen (talk) 08:02, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ramblersen for you kind comments. @Elekhh: I've worked quite a bit on the Utzon article but have not yet embarked on a full revision of the Sydney Opera House section which needs special treatment. Some of the content is over emotional and does not fully relate to the facts. For example, the Australians did ultimately give Utzon recognition for his work and invited him to design updates. They also created an "Utzon Room" which was dedicated in October 2004. I'll have to get back to it. - Ipigott (talk) 14:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Already great improvement! I think his Danish oeuvre is a bit downplayed currently with "While many of Utzon's works are spread over the globe, there are some notable achievements in Denmark too". If I look to the list of built works, from 18 buildings 11 are in Denmark plus two in neighbouring Sweden. The other are 2 in Spain, 2 in the Middle East and 1 in Australia. --Elekhh (talk) 07:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bagsværd Church

Materialscientist (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Utzons

Glad to see the growing coverage of the topic. Just nominated another DYK. --Elekhh (talk) 20:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Glad to see there was so much interest in Bagsværd Church. I see interest in Utzon has also increased, no doubt partly as a result of the Bagsværd article. Thanks also for your own work on the article. Do you think it meets the conditions for a B? I hope to continue coverage with more articles on his housing projects. - Ipigott (talk) 06:03, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

If you mean Bagsværd Church, than yes, is comprehensive, and with some further expansion could be a good GA candidate. With Utzon, am not sure yet of the structure. If the content of the "Foreign masterpieces" section is to stay I would rather rename it to "Works in the Middle East" (or Arabic World) given that his "main" masterpiece is not included. A legacy section would be also good. Regarding legacy, I remember to have read something interesting from Frampton - will try to dig it up. --Elekhh (talk) 03:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I too am a little concerned about the layout of the Utzon article. Moreover, as I continue to write articles covering his individual projects, I am becoming aware of a number of gaps in the article. Quite a bit more could be said about his early life and architectural intentions as well as his influence and legacy. Maybe you could help here too? - Ipigott (talk) 06:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Great to see the new articles but if I may interfere for a moment, I think special attention is needed regarding "his" late works. There is a pronounced tendency to claim his authorship of works (for marketing reasons) which are esentially designed by his sons, either explicitly or by implication, referring to them as "an Utzon". The Utzon Centre in Aalborg is designed by Kim, not Jørn. You can see some comments about the issue here. It is of course not valid as a source but if you follow the uploaders history on Flicker, there is no doubt that he is an architect with a background in architectural research and Modernism as a specialty. I have also heard the issue commented upon by architects several times but it will of course ultimately rely on what can be referenced. Maybe this seier+seier can be contacted through Flicker for sources or other details if there is doubt. Ramblersen (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

You are probably right in everything you say about Kim and Jan designing "his" later works but in the case of the Utzon Center it is difficult to contradict the centre's own website and the large chunks of comment by Jørn Utzon. Even the Utzon Forskning arm of Aalborg University (where the project was initiated) states: "The Utzon Center building... was designed by Jørn Utzon in collaboration with the office of his architect son Kim Utzon." No wonder the newspapers picked up the same story! Unfortunately even Kim does not provide any insight on his own project pages. I have however slightly amended the lead which may put a different perspective on who did what. I have also added the category Kim Utzon buildings. But if you can find any better sources in support of Kim, please feel free to use them as a basis for amending the article. - Ipigott (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly, I see that SEIER+SEIER contributed to the article in 2007 and put together most of the items in Selected works. He has not contributed much to Wikipedia since then. - Ipigott (talk) 15:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I guess you are right about the reference thing and I kind of knew it already so sorry for troubling you with it. I have just heard this issue commented upon so many times that I figured one my just as well try to avoid future protests. SEIER+SEIER continues to provide us with a lot of great photos though, although I wish he would upload them to wikipedia directly and not bequite as hung up on Modernism.:)Ramblersen (talk) 15:59, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

If we complain about the cake than I wish he had a better camera so his otherwise excellent images were less grainy and with less chromatic aberrations, and could be featured on the main page. Back to Utzon, it is actually almost always the case that the "starchitect" gets all the credit even if there are dozens of other architects involved. For Utzon is interesting to see how many of his initial designs have been continued by other architects, not just his sons. So in a way the best illustrations for the article would be his sketches (100% Jørn!). Maybe we should upload some under fair use, but would need a strong argument for which one to upload in particular. --Elekhh (talk) 21:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the sketches are certainly very telling. I particularly like these which were the basis for Bagsværd Church. As for actually using them in articles, I think it would be difficult to justify fair use. Maybe the best way to include them would be to add specific sketches (or the articles containing them) to external links. And while we are still discussing the Utzon article, I am rather concerned about the two similar sections: Literature and Further reading. Perhaps under Further reading we could have two sections: Works by Jørn Utzon and Related literature. What do you think? In regard to the section on Awards and recognition, I think it would be a good idea to eliminate the title "Death and honours" and reword it as an introduction to the section, possibly followed by the list of awards with a word or two of explanation on each. The items particularly relating to Utzon's death could be included in Later life. Should I go ahead with this? - Ipigott (talk) 06:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh yeh, "death and honours" sounds ridiculous, as he would have been a military hero. Literature and Further readings is following MOS:APPENDIX, where "Literature" actually refers to Publications of own writings. I think this could be integrated with Selected projects or elsewhere in the prose as he wrote so little that is no need to have it in list form. With the sketches, I think if we agree that they are important, it is worth opening a discussion on the village pump. I am happy to take that initiative if I have your support. Just because it is not current practice does not mean it shouldn't be possible. --Elekhh (talk) 06:48, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Well he did write three pretty comprehensive "Logbooks" giving detailed accounts of his projects and a 23-page publication on the Sydney Opera House. There are also two books which present his work with lots of his drawings, etc.: "Utzon and the New Tradition" and "Utzon's own houses" (both translated from the Danish and edited by Martin Keiding) which are tantamount to his own work. All six, together with the journal articles ascribed to Utzon under the present heading "Literature" could perhaps be listed as Written works immediately under the section on Selected works (perhaps renamed "Buildings and projects")? As for the sketches, I would certainly support your efforts to justify fair use. Were you thinking of selecting just one sketch for the Utzon article or additional sketches for the articles about his projects? And if so, which ones? - Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

DYKs

While the Paustian DYK is still stalled at the hook review, do you have any hooky suggestions for the Utzon Center and Fredensborg Houses ? --Elekhh (talk) 07:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy with "that the inspiration for the Paustian House (pictured) in Copenhagen came to architect Jørn Utzon while he was walking through a forest of beech trees?" So why is it still stuck? As for the Utzon Center, I suggest "that the Utzon Center celebrating the architect Jørn Utzon in Aalborg, Denmark, is not a museum but a place where students can discuss their ideas?" For the Fredensborg Houses: "that the Fredensborg Houses were specifically designed by Jørn Utzon for Danes returning from service abroad?" - Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

5.6 k for Paustian House and 5.4 k for Fredensborg_Houses, that's pretty good exposure. Lucky that due to lack of DYK nominations current main page time is 12 hours instead of 6/8 h. Utzon Centre is in the queue (with picture), to be up in a day or so. --Elekhh (talk) 11:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was a pretty good showing. And there were 1.7 k views of the Jørn Utzon article on the 26th too. So you ARE helping to put Denmark on the architectural map! Glad to see the Utzon Center in the queue too. Thanks for you efforts. - Ipigott (talk) 11:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Outline of culture

You provided some feedback on the Outline of culture awhile back, and it was improved according to your suggestions. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind looking it over again and making suggestions on how it could be further improved. It's one of the main outlines (on one of the broadest subjects), and should therefore set an example of high quality for other outlines to follow. I look forward to your observations on the outline's talk page. Thank you. The Transhumanist 01:31, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

I also noticed your reply from last fall. Useful advice concerning the placement of links. There are many pages it should be linked on. Those hadn't occurred to me. Thank you! The Transhumanist 00:32, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Mårup Church

Thanks for your compliment and tweaks. Marrante (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. Always good to see new contributors interested in Denmark. - Ipigott (talk) 15:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on over 7,000 page views. Very good for a church! - Ipigott (talk) 07:00, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Question

How can you tell how many watchers a page has? The Transhumanist 00:30, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Go to history and click on watchers. This is what you get for Outline of culture. By contrast, Culture has about 5,000 page views a day and 255 watchers. Outline of physical science which seems to be more popular (some 700 page views a day) has 58 watchers while Science has about 8,500 page views a day and 563 watchers. Natural science has about 2,000 page views a day and 111 watchers. Outline of finance with some 200 page views a day has 55 watchers. The other outline articles do not seem to be very popular. Hope this helps. - Ipigott (talk) 06:58, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Paustian House

Orlady (talk) 22:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Utzon

I have uploaded a bunch of photos of the Fredensborg Houses to commons and will lrave it to you to decide which one to use in the article. As for the Can Liz article, I you may want to add something on the latest development: The Utzon Foundation recently acquired the house and will use it as a scholarship residency for architects from around the world, see [

here] and here here there is also video footage from the house. The aftermath section might fit better in the history section. As for the Fredensborg Houses, it might be worth mentioning that they are also open to non-ex-expats.Ramblersen (talk) 00:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all the photos of the Fredensborg Houses. They look great! Did you go up there specially to take them yourself? Have you a source on the houses being open to ex-pats? Thanks also for your suggestions and links Can Lis. I've already made one or two changes. - Ipigott (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I was in Nødebo just on the other side of Lake Esrom for the weekend anyway so it was no trouble at all. Not the sharpest pictures and the colours seem quite off but now they are there until something better pops up - I am sure some architecture buff will provide something at some point, there always seem to be people photograpjing eventhough tresspassing is discouraged by signs. I may not have made myselv clear about who it is open to. What I meant was that there are also people who doesn't have a past as Danes abroad living there, not that it is open to ex-pats in Denmark. But no source (other than I know about several people who have lived there) so if it they don't mention it on the website there is probably no need to mention it.Ramblersen (talk) 10:55, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Well it was good to have the photos just in time for DYK. Personally I think they give a very good impression of the site, especially as the sun was shining so brightly. - Ipigott (talk) 14:14, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Fredensborg Houses

Orlady (talk) 10:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Utzon Center

Orlady (talk) 12:02, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

The naming of cats

...is a difficult matter. I constantly find muself in doubt when it comes to the naming of articles which in Danish contain a genitive -s. Danish seems obsessed with them while they to me often look quite wrong in English so I tend simply to leave them out. I guess there is no general answer to the question but should I for instance rather move Moltke Mansion to Moltke's Mansion? (Skagen Museum present a similar problem). In general, if I go for a bad translation of something in a title, don't hesitate simply to move it to whatever you think is more correct or accurate.Ramblersen (talk) 04:43, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't mean to be impatient at all but have you possibly missed this question due to the addition of the following section before you checked your talk page?Ramblersen (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello. May I join in here? I suggest that it would be mostly correct to use an idiomatic translation, thus certainly Skagen Museum and Moltke Mansion. The first phrase in the lead: "The Moltke Mansion" illustrates the correct English idiom. The question of genitive-or-nothing is a bit like accusative-or-dative-after-this-preposition which is a question of correct grammar in each language. --Mirokado (talk) 13:48, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the Moltke article further, I notice "Gyldenløve's little mansion" which also seems natural as it appears in that context. You could consider providing a redirect from the alternative "Moltke's Mansion" to the current article (there is similarly a redirect from Moltke's Palace to Amalienborg Palace) and I suggest you provide the Danish name in the lead so that people know what to search for in Danish sources. --Mirokado (talk) 13:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to keep you waiting on this one. Unfortunately there is no hard and fast rule. My own approach is to look for existing English translations, preferably from authentic English sources. If these do not exist, then from the Danish ones. And finally, as Mirokado suggests, use what appears most natural. On the basis of the above criteria, I would have chosen Moltke's Mansion but The Moltke Mansion, which would provide Moltke Mansion as a WP title, is OK too, just as we have Ernest Hemingway House. So it's six of one and half a dozen of the other as they say! - Ipigott (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Denmark

Just noticed that the article Denmark read by 7,000 people per day has a poor coverage, with architecture, design, painting and photography completely absent. As you are much more knowledgeable on these, would be great if you could introduce a phrase or two linking to the relevant articles and reducing the current bias.

Regarding architecture sketches, I was thinking that if there will be no complaints at WikiProject Architecture, after a week or so to start with only a few uploads where a very strong case for fair use can be made. For Utzon, I would start with the Bagsværd sketch described in the article. The same sketch has been included in all major publications about the church (Norberg-Schulz, Weston, Louisiana), thus it could be argued per the Non-free content guidelines that is an image of "...iconic status or historical importance: Iconic or historical images that are themselves the subject of sourced commentary in the article are generally appropriate". --Elekhh (talk) 05:38, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the only European country which has really good coverage of the various branches of culture is France. Surprisingly, even Germany is pretty scanty. But when I have a little more time, say tomorrow, I'll certainly try to enhance the Denmark article with sections on each branch of culture à la française. In due course, I'll try to do the same for Luxembourg and perhaps also for the Netherlands. I hope you are successful with the sketches. I see no reason why your arguments should not be accepted. - Ipigott (talk) 06:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I've now added a few extra sections to culture as suggested but am a bit worried there is quite a bit of redundancy with Culture of Denmark. Now its up to 137 kB (but still substantially shorter than France). Never mind, it's probably important to have the main headings in the Denmark article too. I've also tried to tidy the article up a bit. It looked rather messy before and could still do with some more careful attention. Please feel free to make any further changes you feel are necessary. - Ipigott (talk) 15:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Very nice work, and I think it helps a lot in making the article more comprehensive. When I saw Germany I was about to nominate for delist from it's undeserved FA status but than noticed that it has been reviewed recently, so just added the links... Unfortunately articles on countries -which are among the most read ones- tend to be biased towards history, governance and neoclassic economics, and be weak up to ignorant in regards of society, culture and environment. Hopefully in time a line or two about Danish culture might get into the lead even. I also agree that is rather too long, but I would rather trim the history part, which I would suspect has much more redundancy with other articles. Btw nice article on Svaneke Water Tower, now I think Utzon is together with I. M. Pei the best covered Pritzker winning architect. --Elekhh (talk) 06:31, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I notice that Denmark was once a GA. Perhaps that status could be retrieved. Unfortunately quite a bit of additional referencing is required as well as updating some of the factual data. And we probably need a expert on sports to look that section over. Glad you liked the short article on the water tower. I am rather baffled by numerous references to a design dating back to 1946, which seems very early to me. At the time, Bornholm was still occupied by the Russians! But perhaps he designed it for somewhere else? I'm still adding bits and pieces to the article. I'm also thinking about doing short articles on his other built projects. Maybe also something on the unbuilt Silkeborg Museum? - Ipigott (talk) 06:51, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

That GA was quite a while ago in 2006, and you're right that for such giant articles quite an effort is required. Utzon would be much easier task :). I'm also surprised by the coverage of Svaneke, which I did not know much about, but has a Wiki article in Polish since 2005. Will put together a DYK when I have some time, but waiting times are disappointing atm. Notable unbuilt projects will be of course good test cases for fair use sketches;) The other article I thought about was Skagen Odde Naturcenter which I know is an interesting building as I visited it a while ago, but am surprised not to find much literature about in English. --Elekhh (talk) 07:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

As I am a regular visitor to Svaneke, I added quite a lot to the article myself. If you ever get the chance, you should go there. It's one of Denmark's real beauty spots - and still completely unspoilt. The Poles, btw, are frequent visitors to Bornholm as there is a direct ferry. Re Utzon, I'll look into the Skagen Nature Centre. - Ipigott (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Skagen Odde Nature Centre is now up and running. - Ipigott (talk) 11:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Utzon Navbar? Roskilde peer review.

Since there is now such a comprehensive set of articles about Utzon's buildings, you think a navbar would be useful? There is only one precedent for Gehry so far. Also just a hint in case you're interested Roskilde Cathedral is at peer review. --Elekhh (talk) 07:12, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I think it would indeed be useful to have a nav bar for Utzon - although apart from his few completed works, there are likely to be lots of red links on his unbuilt projects. Compared to some of the architects he admired (Le Corbusier, Louis Kahn, Alvar Aalto), there is not much to put in a nav bar but given the fact that he is generally only associated with the Sydney Opera House, it might well be a good idea to have one. Perhaps our friend Ramblersen could help out if you don't feel like taking it on yourself. As for Roskilde Cathedral, given the amount of detailed information, I would already give it a C grading. This could quickly be brought up to B if many of the key parts of the article were sourced with in-line references. To help out, I could try to improve the prose where required. I'm always a bit concerned by the procedural side of these reviews. Should comments simply be made on the article's talk page or should they be made at Wikipedia:Peer review/Roskilde Cathedral/archive1. KDLarsen has certainly been doing quite a good job recently - so perhaps comments should be on his talk page? - Ipigott (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I can do a navbar, no problem. I think it actually works better when is not too long, I would be scared by a "bar" (or rather column) for F.L.Wright for instance. I think comments regarding article improvement should go on the peer review page. That page will be always linked from the article talk page, so other editors who might wish to join in will know what's going on. We should probably also discuss more of the strictly Utzon related stuff on Talk:Utzon itself. --Elekhh (talk) 20:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Look forward to the nav bar. Fully agree Utzon issues should be discussed on the relevant talk pages. This section on Denmark is getting impossibly long and your recent messages have been difficult to find. - Ipigott (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Lang Lang

After a wonderful concert of Messiah and a very good on of The Creation yesterday I finally looked at Lang Lang, but think I can't be of much help, sorry. I started to improve Andreas Scholl in German, at least. Back to Lang Lang: I would like to see all these reviews, some very trivial, AFTER some facts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the work you have done on Scholl and decided to leave it there. I did what I could with Lang Lang but, like you, am still not happy with the article. Glad to hear your concerts went so well. - Ipigott (talk) 14:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I added more to the German Scholl, hesitating about the English, will sleep over it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the copyediting on Jim Goad Ian! SarahStierch (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. I always enjoy reading your well researched articles and I can just as well copy edit as I read them. Perhaps just one little suggestion: try to avoid using too many "woulds" instead of a simple past tense. For me, when used to describe a past event, "would" usually has a sense of continuity, as in: "He would always read the paper before going to work." That's seldom the case in your accounts. Apart from that, there's not much to say about your style or presentation. Well done! - Ipigott (talk) 14:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip! Even at my age I still get rather embarrassed about my grammar, so kind thoughts are always welcome. Thanks again :) SarahStierch (talk) 22:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Mystery

Please solve this mystery if you can...

On September 23rd, traffic to Portal:James Bond doubled, and has stayed at the new level since then. I can't figure out what happened.

See http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Portal%3AJames_Bond

Traffic to Outline of James Bond stayed the same (though it was at the higher-level already), which leads me to suspect changes made somewhere in Wikipedia.

See http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Outline%20of%20James_Bond

I'd like to find out what happened, in case it reveals helpful link placement tips that can double the traffic to outlines too!

I look forward to your reply on my talk page. The Transhumanist 00:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Louise!

The GA reviewer has transcluded the review to the talk page....anyday now! Keep your eyes peeled! SarahStierch (talk) 04:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You have already done a really good job with Louise Nevelson. Once the comments come up, I'll try to help out with any further tidying up. - Ipigott (talk) 05:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I've now done what I can with this unless there are more comments requiring attention. Let me know if ever you need further help with this or any other articles. - Ipigott (talk) 15:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		Archives of American Art Barnstar
		I, Sarah Stierch, hereby award you, Ipigott, with the Archives of American Art Barnstar for your contributions related to improving coverage about American art on Wikimedia projects, and especially assisting in helping Louise Nevelson become a good article! Thanks so much! SarahStierch (talk) 22:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Glad the article finally made it. You did nearly all the work yourself and so the barnstar should really be yours. I see that this is the third award you have given me in connection with your work. Thanks once again for your kind consideration. - Ipigott (talk) 05:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Architecture WikiProject Award

		WikiProject Architecture Award
		For your outstanding contributions to Wikipedia's coverage of Architecture of Denmark and Jørn Utzon's oeuvre, as well as your role in stimulating a friendly collaborative editorial environment. Elekhh (talk) 21:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. The whole Utzon enterprise was a result of your initial interest in Bagsværd Church. I'm tied up with all kinds of things at the moment but I intend to return to Utzon one of these days to cover some of his unbuilt projects. Perhaps we should also improve the articles on Arne Jacobsen whose architectural works are highly appreciated by the Danes? Much remains to be done on the coverage of his projects. - Ipigott (talk) 10:39, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes, well identified priority. His design is of worldwide relevance. --Elekhh (talk) 14:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Bellavista

Thanks for starting this article. I was thinking about a DYK nom with "... that the Bellavista housing estate (pictured) designed by Arne Jacobsen is the earliest example of Bauhaus architecture in Denmark" but the ref is translated by google as "clearest example" not "earliest example". Can you please confirm?. --Elekhh (talk) 00:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

You (and Google) are absolutely right - my mistake. I misread the passage. Two similar words in Danish: tidlig (early) and tydelig (clear). I've now corrected the article. Thanks for drawing my attention to the error and for the other improvements you have made to the article. So the DYK could read "... that the Bellavista housing estate (pictured) designed by Arne Jacobsen is the clearest example of Bauhaus architecture in Denmark." - Ipigott (talk) 07:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

At least I learned two words in Danish! The DYK nomination is posted, but with a backlog of 280 nominations it might take very long until it will be reviewed. --Elekhh (talk) 07:38, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. No rush. Good to see that so many people are writing interesting new articles. - Ipigott (talk) 07:45, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Ipigott/Archive 4! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Church of St Peter, Berende

Hi, thanks for your interest in the article, it's a great feeling when people are genuinely intrigued by one's work! Onto the main point: I think the problem with this website is that hit.bg and its subdomains may not be available outside Bulgaria. The content of the four page is as follows (hope it's not a copyright infringement):

Църквата "Св.св. Петър и Павел" (ХІVв.) в с.Беренде се намира на 1 км. западно от селото, до р.Нишава, в двора на старите гробища. Тя е малка, правоъгълна, с една полукръгла абсида. Покрита е с полуцилиндричен свод и двускатен покрив с каменни плочи. Входът е от запад. Липсва архитектурна украса, с изключение на плитката ниша над входа и тесните прозорчета в олтарната ниша и южната стена. Иконостасът и се датира във втората половина на ХІV в. и е един от най-старите запазени по нашите земи. Той има проста конструкция, изработен е от дебели, грубо одялани греди и дъски с избледняла живописна украса. Той е конструктивно свързан с с двете надлъжни стени и има 3 отвора: за страничната врата, за централните двери и за поставяне на подвижна икона.

Липсват каквито и да било летописни сведения и данни за строителството на църквата. Изследователите я смятат за начало на серията малки еднокорабни църкви, чийто тип става господстващ за култовите сгради на Балканите през османския период от края на ХІV в. насам. Това е времето, в което редица местни аристократи и низши духовници строят собствени църкви, отразяващи до голяма степен местните предпочитания и вкусове.Сред правите светци от първия регистър има няколко изкусни изображения, като тези на св.Теодор Стратилат, св.Димитър и дякон Роман Сладкопевец. Патронът на храма ап.Петър е представен в бюст на стената, непосредствено пред олтарната преграда. Изображението е огромно и намира много редки паралели в западнобългарските земи (Псача, Македония).

За отбелязване са образите на: Христос "Недремано око" вдясно от абсидата и на Св. Алекси "Човек божи", отстрани на входната врата. В горните части на стените се намират сцените от Големите църковни празници, като под тях се разгъват композиции от цикъла "Страстна седмица". В свода са представени 2 реда пророци и "Събора на архангелите". Редица от медальони, около които фонът е запълнен с растителни мотиви, отделя реда на правите светци от Евангелския цикъл. Изследователите разграничават най-малко два майсторски похвата, подсказващи рисунък на отделни, различаващи се в опита и майсторството си творци.

Върху външната западна стена до началото на ХХв. е било запазено царско изображение и надпис:

"iwань асень въ ха ба. Блговере нь црь. и само дръжець (вьсемъ) бльга(ромь и гръкомъ)".

С разкриването на стенописите в църквата "Св.Никола" в Станичене, Пиротско, където в 1331-1332 цар Иван Александър (1331-1371) назован "Иван Асен", се доказа че датировката на църквата "Св.Петър" в ХІVв. отговаря на стиловите особености на стенописите и е правомерна.От дясно на пътя от с. Беренде към църквата се намира природния феномен Моста (скален мост).

As for photos of the frescoes, this blog is a great source as well. I'm not sure whether I should upload any more of them (the article doesn't really have room for any more images in my opinion), but it may be a good idea to include external links to these blogs.

Best, — Toдor Boжinov — 10:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll add a few more frescoes in the format you suggested, I think it would be pretty tidy this way. You're right that an article in Bulgarian would scare people off from having a look at the images outside Wikipedia. When I include additional images, I'll definitely create a Commons category and template. Thanks for the recommendations! :) — Toдor Boжinov — 15:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello!

Hi Ipigott,

Just saying hello, I saw you did some copy edit on a short article I wrote (Durango Rock Shelters Archeology Site).

Good to see you around! I kind of miss you, Modernist and Sitush since I've moved on to Colorado \ Southwestern US articles.

I hope all is well!--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Good to hear from you too. I was really impressed with your recent articles Archaic–Early Basketmaker Era and Pueblo V Era, especially as they are all your own work. I started to look through them and found practically nothing needing copy editing. Also great work on all the other Pueblo and Basketmaker era articles. You seem to have identified an exciting new field of interest. As you probably know, Top-down articles like these serve a very useful purpose. Pity not more people are looking at them yet. Maybe more sepcific nav bars would help? And more wikilinks, see also's, etc., from related artles? Perhaps a nav bar on Ancient Pueblo Peoples, a popular starting point, would do the trick? The Pre-Columbian nav bar just has too many links all at once and your work does not seem to be included anyway! Keep in touch. - Ipigott (talk) 12:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Great points. I've been taking a bit of a breather to work on other things in my personal life, and within a day or two I'm looking to expand each of the Basketmaker and Pueblo articles (and some other Colorado prehistory articles). When I get that done (and have more cross-linking content), it sounds like a great idea to then better network with other articles and create a navigation template. Always great ideas, Ipigott! Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bellavista housing estate

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Bellavista - another great contribution to architecture! Whiteghost.ink 01:23, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I am interested but did not know about this Bellavista before :) This DYK was timely as I had spent Wednesday evening at a talk given in conjunction with this exhibition which among much else, contains original examples from the Bauhaus. Whiteghost.ink 08:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Danish modern continued

I visited the Danish Design Museum the other day to say if I could get some more images but unfortunately the result was rather poor, they don't exavtly do the best job in the presentation of the furniture, the selection is not that impressive and it is hard to get far enough awat from many of them. I will upload a few of them. As for your question the other day about possible other names to include, I think Grete Jalk should be covered (she for her writings/documentation). I have found a couple of images, one on Flicker and one in Commons from MOMA which just hadn't been categorized. The MOMA images also show half of Wegner's Valet chair in the background. If you happen to know someone in a major city (be it NYC, Paris London, Paris, Tokyo or probably most others) with a reasonable interest in design, I think some really good illustrations could be provided from their local design museums. Maybe some locals active on Wiki Commons could help out. And then a small thing from the cabinet of curiousities which may be worth mentioning in the Finn Juhl article and a possible one about his house: Some Japanese entusiasts are currently building a 1:1 copy of the Ginn Juhl House in Japan to celebrate his 100 years birthsday next year, some info here. And a last thing, wouldn't it be more appropriate to locate your article on Sørrerød Town Hall at Rudersdal Town Hall and the redirect at Søllerød?Ramblersen (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for mixing in, just letting you know that there is a GLAM running at MOMA NY with User:Pharos as Wikipedian in Residence - he might be able to help if you need material from them. --Elekhh (talk) 07:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ramblersen for all your trouble on the images. The Peacock Chair and Mogensen's works should certainly be added to the articles. Interesting snippet on Finn Juhl. Grete Jalk with her Dansk Møbelkunst gennem 40 år should probably be mentioned but I was wondering if she and many other later designers should not become part of another article on Danish furniture design since the Danish Modern period. In any case, with your photo of her nested tables and her chair in the MOMA image, a good start would be a biography on Jalk who is not even covered in the Danish Wikipedia. I thought quite a bit about the name of the article on Søllerød but decided to keep Sørrerød Town Hall as in the English-speaking world, this is the name associated with the building in question (and that's what the article is all about). If it were to be called Rudersdal Town Hall, it would also appear as such in the related categories and would probably not attract much attention. In any case, there is already an article on Rudersdal Municipality. @Elekhh: Thanks for the tip on MOMA. I actually visited the room devoted to Danish design a couple of years ago but my photographs are not detailed enough to show the individual objects. I'll get in touch with Pharos. - Ipigott (talk) 09:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

On researching Grete Falk, I see she fits in pretty well. Now she is in Danish modern and also has her own biography. - Ipigott (talk) 15:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

You have probably thought this through already but I see you are making separate articles about Peter Hvidt and Orla Mølgaard-Nielsen and am wondering if it would not be better to put it all in an article about Hvidt & Mølgaard. They seem to have collaborated on all their works and the firm also continued after their day and until it was recently split in two (Hvidt Arkitekterand Arkitekter). If a shared article is good enough for Charles and Ray Eames I think it should do for Hvidt and Mølgaard too.Ramblersen (talk) 08:56, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I did indeed think about it but came to the conclusion that the two individuals really deserved biographies of their own. But as Hvidt & Mølgaard was one of the biggest architecture concerns in Denmark, it would probably be a good idea to have an article about the firm too. As you say, the firm also continued to design impressive buildings in Copenhagen for Dong and Nokia after the involvement of the two founding architects. Perhaps also a few lines on Hvidt Arkitekter and Holsøe Arkitekter? As you've already written quite a few articles on architectural firms, perhaps you would like to handle these too? Maybe Charles and Ray Eames should also have separate articles? And Tove Kindt-Larsen probably deserves one too. Just a matter of finding time to fit them all in. But I can also see the light at the end of the tunnel. - Ipigott (talk) 12:16, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I yrnd to think that it will be better simply to link the few references to Hvidt & Mølgaard out there to either of your biographies. An article will pretty much esentially be a repetition of them with a few extra projects at the end. As for Hvidt Arkitekter and Holsøe Arkitekter I think they are too new to get articles, they haven't really done much yet on their own except for some projects which were really made before the split such as Teglværksbroen] on Hvidt's website. Do you have any information on who were the principal architect on the Vejle Fjord and Little Belt Bridges and therefore the more relevant individual to link to?Ramblersen (talk) 13:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Details of Lillebæltsbroen here and Vejlefjordbroen here. Looks as if H & M were in fact the main architects. Click on "Byggeriets øvrige parter" at the bottom of the page for further details. - Ipigott (talk) 14:06, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

As you can see I have now added an article on Hvidt & Mølgaard but I was a bit in doubt how much to include about the early history - the part which is already covered in the two biographies. I think a bit more should be added though, what do you think? Maybe it is worth adding a short section about the headquarters to the ESRI article to get the link in there and the possible extra traffic (although the 5000+ readers are obviously not there for the architecture). Oh and here are a few more Danish modern names in case you haven't had enough. I am not going to add them to the list though since I don't want to put out the light at the end of your tunnel but now you know they are there (ps and sorry for messing up your Peter Hvidt article).Ramblersen (talk) 08:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I had just completed a quick edit of Hvidt & Mølgaard when your message popped up. If you want to include ESRI, then I think you need a section headed "Follow-up" or something similar. Alternatively you could add a short article on Hvidt arkitekter. Maybe it would indeed be useful to add a bit more on H&M's furniture activities. In this connection, I was also wondering if a new category Category:Furniture companies of Denmark should not be added - and if so, who else to include? Thanks for the office furniture link. I certainly think some, if not all, of these should be added together with biographies. - Ipigott (talk) 08:20, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

As for ESRI, it was actually designed in the Hvidt & Mølgaard days as can be seen here and here so I think it is okay to include it but I should of course have gone with a source which credits them, thanks for bringing my attention to it. In the section on the split I first wrote that that ESRI and the Teglværks Bridge was subseguently completed by Hvidt Arkitekter but I came in doubt as to exactly who did what after the split so I deleted it for now. It is very common in the architecture industry that new companies take credit even for projects completed before their foundation since they need something for their portifolio to get them off to a good start (and it is of course the same people who have made it). I wouldn not include a section on Hvidt Arkitekter or projects which date from after the split, that may just as well be put in another article but I don't think they have done much on their own yet so there are dozens of other firms more in need of coverage. But now we are at it, the mention of the Vejle Fjord Bridge should maybe be excluded from the Peter Hvidt article since it seems to date from after his retirement. But the start year (1975) is actually the year he left so maybe it is okay to mention it.Ramblersen (talk) 11:01, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Furniture companies of Denmark

I knew I forgot something and will gon with a new section since the old gets very long (but don't miss that I have already made one response at the end of the previous section). I see you have already made the category but as I understand the system, Hvidt & Mølgaard would go in Category:Design companies of Denmark while Furniture companies is only for manufacturers. I may be wrong though, haven't looked into it. As for who else to include I don't really know much about the subject so I would say "whoever who would get most links in all your biographies". My impression is Erik Jørgensen and Carl Hansen & Son (Wegner at least). As for newer companies, Hay and Gubi seems to be the most high profile ones and I also think Montana has quite a big export plus they have done various other projects, including the design and sponsoring of a gallery in the Black Diamond extension but that is pretty much all I know about them. Rather than the manufacturers, I think it is a better priority to focuss on improving the articles on the most important couple of designers though. If a nav bar for Danish modern is to include a category called 'chairs' or 'designs', it would probably also be good to give more of the most important individual works articles - at least a few so that Arne Jacobsen chairs and PH lamps aren't so dominant. Only problem is that the images that are available are so poor. I have to be gone now but I will look more into it later.Ramblersen (talk) 11:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

You may be right about the disctinction between Design companies and Furniture companies. I'll try to sort it out. Maybe both apply. I don't know to what extent separate articles should be written on specific items of furniture. As you say, without appropriate images the articles would not be very meaningful. Anyway, for the time being I'll keep working on the biographies. - Ipigott (talk) 11:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for writing the article on Danish folklore, really good addition to the encyclopedia. I am currently writing Danish traditional music - perhas you want to help me? Anyway: good work! ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 20:33, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Magnus. I was in fact going to drop you a line too as I have of course been following your work on Danish traditional music. I would be only too happy to help but I see you have already prepared for a few additional sections on the dances, etc., and you seem to have an impressive resource in John Bæk's paper on Dansk Spillemandsmusik which will certainly provide lots of background for further additions. My priority at the moment is to expand the Danish folklore article with more examples of folk tales, sayings, poems, illustrations, etc., and also to write or improve biographies on some of the 19th century contributors to the collections starting with Evald Tang Kristensen. So your help would also be welcome. Your work on native languages in Mexico also looks fascinating but I am pleased to see you contributing to articles on Denmark too. - Ipigott (talk) 21:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Great! Tang Kristensen is alredy wikilinked in the music article.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:48, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 21er Haus

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 18:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)