Talk:Art Students League of New York

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

copyvio[edit]

Only the part below the copy violation notice and before the links looks like a violation. Sparkit 15:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question re names of teachers and alumni[edit]

Are these names in any sort of order?Freiherrin (talk) 06:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It might not be in keeping with the character of the League if the list was organized in any sort of order. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 21:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the direct external links to faculty/alumni web sites, as these sites are already properly included in the separate articles for each artist and don't need to be linked again here. Additionally, I integrated the alumni/faculty names that had been listed under "See also" into the general list - there does not appear to be any rationale to separate out these few names. --Shorn again (talk) 00:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the recent edit by Modernist, which appears from its terse summary "rv nn" to have removed Alan Brookman Beddoe from the list of alums as not notable. As he has his own article and sources are cited there, there does not seem to be a rationale for deletion. Modernist, what would the reasoning be? So long as his article is here, this deletion does not appear defensible. If you in good faith feel he is not notable, wouldn't the proper way to begin be a discussion at that page? Shorn again (talk) 21:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For what its worth the deletion was fully justified, made to a red inked addition made by an IP...[1] Having made more than 60 additions to this page I think the above verges on a violation of WP:AGF...against me..Modernist (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're on the same page . . . I myself did not notice the link was dead until after I made the above comment, and subsequently repaired it. Then I realized that was probably why you trimmed it in the first place. I'm also now aware of your substantive contributions across the board on art-related articles. It would be great if some better content could be added to this one, but I don't currently have access to much in the way of reliable sources. The lengthy list is a reasonable start but the article would be improved if more substantive content could be added. --Shorn again (talk) 18:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done. A deeper, richer article about the Art Students League might be possible if it was researched and referenced. It can be subdivided into historical periods. Origins, history of the various studios and buildings, etc. Turn of the century Ashcan School types, early modernism, World War I, World War II, Woodstock in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s - 1960s, Indian Space Painting, Abstract Expressionism. I'll think about it, although I really don't have time to start it...Modernist (talk) 20:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I gave it a whack, entering more information from the ASL's own site and some NYT articles. It's just a rough start and edits and additions are surely necessary and welcome, but at least it begins to get some overall structure in. --Shorn again (talk) 00:53, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration[edit]

How about a photo of the exterior of the building or a studio / class for illustration purposes? --Shorn again (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect I prefer no image to a bad image. The lifeless rendering recently proposed does not due justice to the Art Students League or to the building. A photo would be preferable, nothing is however better than the bloodless rendering. Modernist (talk) 14:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now that a photo has been added (and a nice one at that) I have removed the photo request template. And moved my own comments to this Illustation section, to which they relate. --Shorn again (talk) 22:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am in agreement concerning the current photo and another picture would be welcome. Modernist (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not thinking so highly of the pic when I took it, I'm pleased and surprized at such praise. Since it's down the street from my usual grocery I can try taking a few others at different times of day and weather conditions and offer them to better critics than myself for selection. Not in the next few weeks however; lovely summer weather has kept me on the bicycle, producing a backlog of more than a thousand pix to look through and compare to pictureless articles. Filled my SD card this afternoon in Fresh Pond, Queens and haven't yet finished looking at the previous card. Snowstorms will allow cutting into the backlog. Hope to see some of you on Sunday, Aug 23 at the Wikipicnic at Prospect Park. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent deletions[edit]

Good job with the new categories, and paring both of the long lists down. Some deletions should be restored - those very well known artists who are thought of as being connected to the league - like William Merritt Chase and Charles Alston to name two. Modernist (talk) 11:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Too many names of notable alumni removed... Who is deciding the importance of these artists? And their importance to the League? This should be reviewed. Also, regarding the category "Members of Art Students League": "Member" is the term used by the League for anyone affiliated, instructor or student, past or present.--UBU07 (talk) 05:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We should only list artists with articles and with citation verifications. Kingturtle (talk) 05:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The artists added are all listed on the League's website as notable alumni. If you look them up on askart.com you will find them, with works in museums, etc. Just because an artist does not yet have an article on wikipedia doesn't mean the artist is not notable. --UBU07 (talk) 06:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that notable people still don't have articles yet. I was just trying to think of a way to keep the list manageable. Kingturtle (talk) 06:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
oh, okay. Just that the League is famous for having had most major american artists as members (instructors and/or students) since it was opened (for example the Abstract Expressionists), that is why the list is necessarily so long. --UBU07 (talk) 06:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree in spirit; the lists became so long that they were unreadable after a while..I've re-added a few names..Members are actually selected faculty and students and others who have been nominated and elected; it's not an automatic process...btw..Modernist (talk) 13:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are correct, there is a nomination & election process, it is just that if you look at Linea, they give "Members' News", not "Alumni News" , thanks for making that clear. But the category of Students of Art Students League of New York sounds really awkward?

Thanks for the spelling correction, by the way. --UBU07 (talk) 00:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to delete lists[edit]

This article has improved somewhat in the past year or so, with contributions from many sources, altough the content still needs further development. However, I would argue that the lists of students and teachers add little to the article, and that this not a particularly helpful format for anyone seeking particular information. There has been consensus that anyone considered notable should have their own article written before being listed here. As there are now categories for each of those classifications and the articles on each person can be listed under those categories, the lists here are also redundant. Based on this, I propose deleting the lists entirely from the article and leaving only the links to the category pages. Thoughts? --Shorn again (talk) 21:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment IMO the lists should stay. Perhaps be trimmed from time to time. They don't really harm the article, and they seem to constantly attract new inclusions. It must be important to people...Modernist (talk) 21:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – These lists of people do harm this article in my opinion, it looks like a copy/paste or copyvio and it's not readable as a body of text. If these people are notable, why can't we find other citations? Anyone can add a name in the middle of the long running paragraph (without a new source) and we have no way of verifying it. Jooojay (talk) 17:08, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I mentioned above these lists must be important; they keep growing. However I do agree that the list of alumni should be edited as I said below...Modernist (talk) 22:11, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add[edit]

The school's list of renowned alumni also includes: Alan Brookman Beddoe, Aaron Bohrod, Angna Enters, John Philip Falter, Elaine Hamilton, Thomas Lamb, John Alan Maxwell, Jozef C. Mazur, Henry McBride, Ray Osrin, Sonya Rapoport, Bridget Bate Tichenor, Hervé Villechaize, Stow Wengenroth...Modernist (talk) 13:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was a recent-reverted attempt to add an "Altheus T. Cole" to the page. This seems to be a misspelling, perhaps based on this reference: "Altheus Cole, a onetime teacher at the League". However, there is an Alphaeus Philemon Cole, who is probably the intended party. But, other than the mis-spelled NYT reference, a brief search did not yield a specific link to the ASL as teacher or student. Should probably be added if one can be found. Shorn again (talk) 23:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Instructors[edit]

I recently reverted the add of a long-time ASL instructor who does not appear to be a 'notable' artist per Wikipedia criteria. In brief, generally everyone included is linked to an existing Wikipedia page, which we have taken as sufficient evidence of notablilty. The general consensus is that if someone is notable, build their own page first, then list them here. If there is a compelling reason to include information on someone not notable other than their association with the ASL, provide the rationale. Shorn again (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Art Students League of New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:09, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Art Students League of New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:21, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notable alumni section[edit]

This section needs editing; but otherwise is relevant to the article...Modernist (talk) 12:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Modernist: yes I am in agreement with you we should have this, but right now as it is, this list looks like a copy vio, and has no relevance without clean up and citations. It has been tagged for clean up since May 2020 with no actions. In this talk page from 2008 you were in discussion about organizing and clean up of this list too. How long do we wait? Jooojay (talk) 18:46, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will get to it in the next day or two...Modernist (talk) 18:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy to help, if you need it. Jooojay (talk) 02:54, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Modernist: So, you truly believe that the wall of text in your version is better than a nicely formatted list? WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Absolutely! Let it Be, it works fine...Modernist (talk) 13:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Modernist: I disagree. A formatted list is preferable to the wall of text, and is the norm for every other list of notable alumni on every other page that includes such a list. WP:ALUMNI recommends:
      As the notable alumni of a school typically form an assorted group with little in common, describing all of them in prose would be clumsy. Unless there are very few notable alumni, lists are recommended as the most accessible way of presenting all of them.
Unless you can present a compelling argument to go against this guideline, the list format should be preferred. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've been watching the article for a while and would like to see the names in a bulleted list, as this would be much more readable. I agree that it is currently a wall of text. I would also like to see both lists - staff and students - reduced to only those people with a reliable reference indicating attendance or teaching at the institution. Tacyarg (talk) 22:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC) - Adding that I did not see this through the Third Opinion call and am not uninvolved as I have been watching the article for a while, and have probably edited it, so have not removed this from the Third Opinion call. Tacyarg (talk) 23:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Response to third opinion request:
I see no compelling reason to use unformatted prose, and much reason to use a bulleted list, both for the artists and "instructors and lecturers" sections. A list is much easier to read, scan for the name in question, etc. I will say that the lists are rather long, but all the entries appear to have their own articles, so that's fine. I would recommend wrapping the lists in {{Columns-list}} to make them more compact. Ovinus (talk) 17:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the third opinion. Obvious improvement to the article. Since there seems to be a consensus among 4 editors, I will implement that change, with sourcing needing to be accomplished as well. --Cerebral726 (talk) 17:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That is considerably easier to read and edit. Tacyarg (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Art_Students_League_of_New_York&oldid=1205372006"