Talk:Bud Holman

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

Links to Bud Holman website[edit]

Theroadislong - I found an external reference to eliminate one cite to BudHolman.com - I deleted another. The rest are all a second reference on an external reference to provide a link to the paintings in his Catalogue Raisonné. There is better info and pictures on BudHolman.com. Should I remove them as well? is this the best way to engage with you on your comments? Cal Holman (talk) 17:46, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 4 references to his website contribute nothing to notability because it's a primary source so it's better to find more secondary sources if possible. Theroadislong (talk) 18:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand and can delete them - I added them inline with the secondary citation as they add more detail. The museum websites do not present good pictures of the works. If you think that is not necessary I can delete. Thank you for your help. Cal Holman (talk) 19:36, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Removed Cal Holman (talk) 19:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Questions[edit]

Hoary - I changed the attribution in WikiCommons and sent an email on copyright changes if necessary to Commons VRT. My uncle recently died and I am his only heir and now have possession of his remaining body of work. The pictures came from his website which forms his Catalogue Raisonné and has been online for several years. Cal Holman (talk) 18:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Holman, it's good that you've contacted Commons VRT. (NB as the man was your uncle and you're the copyright holder, you have a conflict of interest; once the draft is accepted as an article, you should not edit it directly but instead, as explained in WP:COI, should limit yourself to making suggestions for it here on this talk page.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:05, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary - I understand - I realize I am biased. The Commons VRT validated the copyright and attribution for the paintings/pictures. Thanks for the guidance. The ticket number is: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2023072010009782 Cal Holman (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cal Holman, the page commons:File:Horseshoe Bend, 2005-2016.jpg now has a template saying "The Wikimedia Foundation has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication" [blah blah], which is what I'd expected to see (though it came much faster than I expected; Commons working very efficiently for once). Good. However, commons:File:Landscape with Lama, 1965-1970.jpg (a file I selected at random) says no such thing. You should "reopen" the VRT "ticket" (well, I think this is the terminology; I'm rather lost in Commons copyright matters) to ask for this template to be attached to all the relevant files. ¶ I notice that the file I chose at random is categorized "Painting by Bud Holman, Bud Holman", which unsurprisingly is in red (because the actual category doesn't exist). A category must exist before it's added to a file. An appropriate title for the category would be "Paintings by Bud Holman", which you'd have to create. The category would itself be categorized within the categories "Paintings by artist" (which already exists) and "Bud Holman" (which you'd have to create). Category:Bud Holman ... uh, enough for now; I'm exhausted. You can attend to this later. In the meantime, though, please don't create categories unless you're pretty sure that you know what you're doing; and don't fret over your incomprehension, as categorizing typically baffles newcomers, until it suddenly (if not always perfectly) "clicks". -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will do - it is my mistake - somehow I missed two of the galleries in making the VRT ticket. Cal Holman (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cal Holman, more on the category "Paintings by Bud Holman". The category "Photographs by Teikō Shiotani" itself belongs to the category "Teikō Shiotani"; and this in turn belongs to the categories "1899 births", "1988 deaths", "Male photographers from Japan", "People of Tottori prefecture" (and also two more, whose appropriateness I'm not sure of). Best to think of people who more or less parallel BH, examine their categorization, guesstimate what the categories for BH should be, check that these categories actually exist, refine/create as needed, and only then add them. -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - I was confused on uploading - i am not sure the category is necessary and will remove Thanks for your help. Cal Holman (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Removed the nonexistent category from all images. Cal Holman (talk) 19:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright on all uploads is corrected. Cal Holman (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Text on Paintings[edit]

User:Hoary - The text is from an analysis by the Director of the Mulvane Art Museum. I cited at the title "Painting" the PDF which are the words of Connie Gibbons not the author of the article. It is a good description of his painting style over the years. Here is the book for the Retrospective show at the Mulvane Art Museum: http://static.holview.com/web/artsite/shows/Topeka%20Show/Holman%20Catalog_2.pdf Is there a better way of presenting this information - clarify in a preface to the text? Cal Holman (talk) 17:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Holman, I notice that all your references are online. (Or anyway they appear to be: I haven't yet clicked on most of them.) This is of course a great convenience for readers. However, it is not required. You're welcome to cite magazine articles, exhibition catalogues, etc, whose only publication has been on paper.
What worries me is the domain holview.com (or more specificially static.holview.com/web). It's not obviously the publisher's website. Wikipedia cannot link to a copyright violation (even if calling it a copyright violation may seem somewhat pedantic)
So if there's any doubt about the legitimacy of the PDF, don't link to it.
You're also welcome to repeatedly use the same reference. Let's say you want to cite page six of a catalogue for one assertion and pages 24–27 of the same catalogue for another assertion. You then use <ref name="catalogue200">[author(s), (editor(s)), title, location, publisher, year, ISBN/OCLC, etc</ref>{{Rp|page=6}} for one reference, and <ref name="catalogue200" />{{Rp|pages=24–27}} for the other.
Unfortunately when you want to cite or quote something that itself is cited or quoted within the source you're looking at, Wikipedia's convenience breaks down. "Say where you read it" suggests [Details of what you want to cite]; cited in <ref>[author(s), (editor(s)), title, location, publisher, year, ISBN/OCLC, etc</ref>{{Rp|page=43}}. Well, don't worry about awkwardness; worry instead about informativeness. -- Hoary (talk) 01:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary - Ok - I was trying to get an online representation of every reference - offline makes things a bit easier. Online makes it easier to ensure it is correct. Thanks for the guidance on the catalog. I will rewrite. Cal Holman (talk) 13:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary - Cleaned up the text and tried to make the block quotes make sense - shortened several. Eliminated the reference to the online museum book. Cal Holman (talk) 16:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Too Much Original Research[edit]

Theroadislong - I have removed all of my original text and left the secondary sources. The Painting section is a quote (and cited) from the book published for his retrospective - I have added the example paintings she references in her text. Is that the text you are talking about? Cal Holman (talk) 19:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The drawing and painting sections are entirely unsourced, we can't use your descriptions of the work, we only report on what the reliable sources say, otherwise it is original research.Theroadislong (talk) 19:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Painting section is cited (at the heading) it is an excerpt from a book created for a retrospective at the Mulvane - not my words. I understand what you are saying. If this is not ok let me know and I will delete. Cal Holman (talk) 19:54, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would then be a copyright violation. Theroadislong (talk) 20:19, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cal Holman, you can of course cite a book: summarizing the relative content in your own words and adding a reference pointing to the relevant page(s) within the book (described in enough detail for it to be easy to find in a research library); and you can of course quote the book: presenting the material in quotation marks if short and within <blockquote> and </blockquote> if long, and adding a reference pointing to the relevant page(s) within the book (again, described in enough detail for it to be easy to find in a research library). Although long quotations are discouraged. -- Hoary (talk) 01:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Got it - will rewrite to be more concise. Cal Holman (talk) 13:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Theroadislong - I see your edit - i was following the example of Cy Twombly, one of his contemporaries, when I wrote that text - he has something very similar. It seemed ok on his article. I suppose we could use another term for the time but his life in NYC and relationship with these artists is important. Cal Holman (talk) 21:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed that sentence from the Cy Twombly article as being irrelevant name dropping, please stick to what is sourced. Theroadislong (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Long Quotation[edit]

Hoary - The Painting quotations are from a museum show and the curator did a great job describing his work. It is a lot, however, a good description. By something wrong is it because there is too much by a single source? Reduce usage? Cal Holman (talk) 13:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and yes. -- Hoary (talk) 21:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary - Reduced text and removed pictures - how is this? Cal Holman (talk) 12:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cal Holman, an hour ago I read: "Bud Holman's style and approach to landscape painting are truly unique in the history of American art". Now, "X is unique in Y" is permissible if a reliable source is cited. But "X is truly unique in Y" sounds promotional; normally it would only be permissible if quoted from a reliable source. It is, I believe, well known that quotations require not just attribution but also fastidious care and quotation marks: certainly I've known it since I was a teenager. But there were no quotation marks. Clearly, something was wrong. I looked at the source and realized that the draft contained a rearranged and somewhat adulterated jumble of quotation. I then sorted this out. This took me some time and did not put me in a good mood. Please read, digest and implement Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotations. Theroadislong and I have already spent too much of our time on this draft. -- Hoary (talk) 23:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize - just not good at this. I hate to waste your time. Removed the content. Cal Holman (talk) 16:03, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Qualifying for WP:NARTIST[edit]

Theroadislong - His work is in the permanent collection of 4 museums. A collection of his drawings is part of a collection in a library in Topeka. His works are currently in four galleries (two online and two brick). Cal Holman (talk) 16:27, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can see only three museums, the Mulvane Art Museum is clearly not notable. The New Mexico Museum of Art reference doesn’t mention any work in a collection? The two unnamed works in the Spencer Museum of Art were gifts of Mr. and Mrs. Charles Edward Holman. I will not review the draft again I will leave it for another reviewer. Theroadislong (talk) 16:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Holmanc, et. al., I did a little clean up today, and separated out the collections. I could only verify three of the four collections. @Theroadislong is correct that the Mulvane Art Museum is not a notable collection. Also, I had the same issue with the New Mexico Museum of Art in that no works come up when doing a collections search, only an "index card" with his name. Did the museum publish a catalog that might state that he is in their collection? Also, I agree that the works in the Spencer that were gifts are not the same as a museum of national gallery of art going through the normal curatorial channels and vetting what they wish to purchase/acquire for their collections. Usually a team of curatorially trained art historians are involved and then their decision is voted on by an acquisitions board or committee. Do you know of any other collections? Netherzone (talk) 12:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Below is the response from the New Mexico Mesum. The attachment shows the three works - now sure how to attach/show the attachment.
Dear Mr. Holman,
Yes, we have 3 paintings by Charles Holman in the collection of the New Mexico Museum of Art. We do not deaccession works, once they come into the collection they remain so in perpetuity.
The reason that you were unable to find Charles Holman’s work on our online site is because of the size of the collection, and due to limited resources and staffing we have only been able to add a fraction of the collection online. Therefore, not all of the works we have are going to appear on there at this time. It is a work in progress with the ultimate goal to eventually have all artworks in the collection posted online.
Attached you will find a list of the works by Holman in the collection. This document does include images of the work. Should you want larger images for your own personal use, I would be happy to send those over. If you would like to use the images for other reasons, you will need to complete the Request to Order Images found on the following linkhttp://nmartmuseum.org/education/research-and-reproductions .
Sincerely,
Erica
Erica Prater, Collections Manager
New Mexico Museum of Art | on the Plaza in Santa Fe
Office 505.476.5071 | Fax 505.476.5076
erica.prater@state.nm.us Cal Holman (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I consider that verification that they are in the permanent collection of the NM Museum of Art, which is a notable museum with an excellent collection. Netherzone (talk) 20:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, in light of this I have accepted the draft, it would of course be useful to have a published source that supported this though. Theroadislong (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree! Netherzone (talk) 21:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing sentences[edit]

It is unclear what this sentence means. Can it be rewritten so that it is less confusing? Holman designed and produced for Sports Illustrated and Abercrombie and Fitch the House in the Sky (Stan Moor House) on Abercrombie and Fitch's rooftop on Madison Avenue. Netherzone (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Holman was hired by Sports Illustrated and Abercrombie and Fitch to design and produce the House in the Sky (Stan Moor House) on the headquarters rooftop of Abercrombie and Fitch, located on Madison Avenue. Still a long sentence. Cal Holman (talk) 12:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cal, why is this an important fact to include? It seems that it was just a job, and I can find no evidence that this was a notable, historical event or structure. It doesn't matter if Sports Illustrated and Abercrombie & Fitch are notable companies that he was hired by. Notability is not inherited. Netherzone (talk) 12:48, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was pretty remarkable at the time - that a home be constructed on top of a building in New York. The home was purchased and moved by the owners to Spring, NY where is remains as occupied home. I have emails from the owners looking for info on the original furnishings and researchers doing work on the original building of the home on top of the building. The link is to a NYC Times article on the event. Cal Holman (talk) 13:02, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The NYTimes link seems to be permanently dead, and nothing comes up on the NYT search engine for either "Stan Moor House" "House in the Sky" (except there are lots of hits for a recent novel of the same name). I've removed the content as it seems like just a regular job an artist would have, if it's not historically important it should simply be listed on his personal resume/CV or his website or on some family memorial webpage, but not in the encyclopedia. Netherzone (talk) 13:08, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another confusing sentence: In 2014, Holman attended an opening in the Morris Gallery of the NOTO Arts Center for a presentation of his drawings of local buildings he had done as a young man. Does it mean that he had a show at the Morris Gallery (or the NOTO arts cntr) when he was a young man which he attended later as an older man? If so, what years were the drawings done? and what is the difference between the gallery and the art center, was the show at two venues or one? Or does it mean that the Morris Gallery/NOTO Arts Center presented early works of his in a 2014 exhibition? (It does not matter if the artist attended the opening or not.) Netherzone (talk) 21:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Holmanc for feedback. Netherzone (talk) 12:25, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In 2014, the Morris Gallery displayed Holman's drawings of local buildings he had done as a young man from 1948-1950. Cal Holman (talk) 12:53, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I added the dates, and improved the sentence. That the drawings were of local buildings is not important. Netherzone (talk) 13:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New York School and Abstract Expressionism and Stable Gallery claims[edit]

Is there an art historical source that actually says he was part of the New York School (art)? And also is there an art historical source that he was part of Abstract Expressionism? His work seems more like lyrical abstraction, and landscape. Netherzone (talk) 13:18, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed these claims from the infobox as I could find noting in the art historical record to substantiate it. I did find the the Mulvane Museum called his work abstracted landscape; I added that to the text.
Regarding the unsourced claim that From 1955 to 1959 his paintings were exhibited in group shows at Eleanor Ward's Stable Gallery. I could not verify that at all. I did an extensive online search, Google Books, and searched the WP:LIB resources and found nothing. I then went to the Smithsonian's Archives of American Art where Eleanor Ward's Stable Gallery archive, papers and files are held, and searched the artist files for Bud Holman/Charles Holman. His name did not come up as being one of the artists who exhibited there, as can be confirmed here: [1]. Therefore I removed the claim as it seems he was not part of the stable. Courtesy ping Holmanc. - Netherzone (talk) 14:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the New York School of art - it was a movement in NYC in the 40s/50s which fostered abstract expressionism. Holman was painting in Greenwich Village beginning in the early 50s and was part of the movement. He experimented during this period focusing on an abstract expressionist version of landscapes. He was influenced by the others in the New York School. Cal Holman (talk) 17:22, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Holmanc, I know what the New York School and Abstract Expressionism are; I'm well versed in the history of modern and contemporary art. What is needed for the encyclopedia to state that he was part of those movements is an independent, verifiable, published reliable source. For example a passage in an art history book; a notable art magazine review or academic journal article, or an essay by an art historian in a museum catalog. Netherzone (talk) 02:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understand - he has a couple of essays which reference the period however nothing in that period
https://discoveriesinamericanart.com/artists/bud-holman/#1540843962475-b2345d27-df5c5a31-813d-bio Cal Holman (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you that essay may be useful for article improvements. Who is the author? I can't seem to find a name...
However it does not establish that he was actually a part of these two movements - it just says he was painting at the same time. It's really not that important if he was officially part of any "movement", what will help the article is more facts about his career that can be properly sourced to independent reliable sources. WP:RS.
Last night I searched Newspapers.com and the NewspaperArchive hoping to find reviews, but I was only able to find two short notices about his time in New Mexico (neither had an author by-line, and neither were actual reviews.) One mentioned a show he hosted at his home on Canyon Rd. in Santa Fe, and the other was just a name-check for a group show in Taos. I also search JSTOR and the Wikipedia Library resources hoping to find reviews in art magazines or art history books but came up cold. If you know of anything like that, please post links and/or information here. I don't doubt that he had a vibrant life and career as an artist, but it seems that he/his work was not well documented. Netherzone (talk) 19:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - they are just articles not reviews. The link is to one by Peter Hastings Falk, Editor & Chief Curator of the online art magazine, DiscoveriesInAmericanArt.com and the second at https://discoveriesinamericanart.com/artists/bud-holman/#1557338662696-e039bbb9-7b22 iis by CONNIE GIBBONS, DIRECTOR OF THE MULVANE ART MUSEUM.
No, I do not have any articles. You are a much better analyst than I. Cal Holman (talk) 20:47, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bud_Holman&oldid=1205266227"