Talk:Jacek Tylicki

Problems

This article rings all sorts of alarm bells for me. The long unverified list of exhibitions is an exact copy paste from Tylicki's copyrighted biography on his website (so technically should be removed). Considering he has been living in New York (the centre of world arts) for over 30 years, there's little to show for it online. He apparently owns the Now Gallery so it is unsurprising he's had solo exhibitions there. Unless he had some major impact in Poland and Sweden, I have a feeling this is a WP:PUFF piece pasted around Wikimedia, with little basis. Sionk (talk) 10:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I think the sources show he is a notable artist from Poland. I'm going to ask WikiProject Poland to get involved for source verification. Viriditas (talk) 10:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

He is a NY artist, Polish Wikipedia quotes English language sources.Xx236 (talk) 11:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC) There is another Jacek Tylicki, born 1962.Xx236 (talk) 11:35, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Send it to AFD. I am not seeing any reliable refs either here or on pl wiki. Seems like a promotional who is who page. Unless somebody cares to rewrite this so that notability is clear, I don't see why we should keep this. I also looked at first 20 hits on Google Books and Google; still not seeing anything. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:49, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Sources show he is a notable artist. Some recent references. Books: http://books.google.co.in/books?id=BzFYLwEACAAJ&dq=jacek+tylicki&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CM8rU7C4BurMyQHz4YGQAQ&redir_esc=y
http://www.amazon.com/Jacek-Tylicki-Artworks-Leszek-Brogowski/dp/098536923X
Artwork sold at International auction houses: Bonhams, London: http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/21527/lot/56/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.13.78 (talk) 05:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Group exhibitions

I've removed the long unsourced list of group exhibitions for the second time. Individual artists rarely get significant news coverage for their particpipation in group exhibitions. Solo exhibitions are much more important to show an artist's success. From what I can see, the artist's website does not even list his exhibitions and instead he links to this Wikipedia article. Wikipedia isn't a free web host for miscellaneous info. Sionk (talk) 18:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Grammar, capitalization, etc.

"Installation" and "photography" are not capitalized unless the first word in a sentence. Two of anything becomes plural so it's "Video and photography play..." not "Video and Photography plays...". Key statements should have in-line citations.--2602:304:CF02:C940:D918:B095:E896:692E (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• Lede paragraphs are not required to have citations. Stop this vindictive and stupid, petty game against an image by Jacek Tylicki on Land art that you don't like...Modernist (talk) 16:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
• Can you cite Wikipedia's guideline for the use of citations in the lead paragraph for key statements? My interest is to improve the article. Whether I like any particular image is not germane to grammar and copy editing.--2602:304:CF02:C940:D918:B095:E896:692E (talk) 17:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• See: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section in short paragraphs like in this article we use WP:UCS and consensus...Modernist (talk) 17:10, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• This is the guideline in question. Read the whole thing, but the key phrase is "Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material." In other words, if what is mentioned in the lede is discussed in the article (as it should be), a source isn't needed if it is sourced elsewhere. By no metric is "land art" controversial especially per WP:BLP. There is no discussion of land art in the article body. There should be, and it should be sourced. A cite needed tag is unnecessary as the article needs improvement, not the lede. We don't over-cite the lede unless absolutely necessary and there's no indication that's it's necessary here. So perhaps instead of edit warring and being disruptive a better use of your time would be expanding the article with sources rather than pointy additions of unnecessary tags. freshacconci (✉) 17:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Correcting grammar and fixing punctuation is not being disruptive. These are basic elements that any editor has a right to correct immediately for any article.2602:304:CF02:C940:D918:B095:E896:692E (talk) 02:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

That's disingenuous as I was clearly talking about the citation needed tag, not grammar or punctuation. You asked a question and I responded. freshacconci (✉) 03:05, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

You went on to talk about disruptive editing...for an article that is in "Start" class.--2602:304:CF02:C940:D918:B095:E896:692E (talk) 03:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Again, I was talking about the citation needed tag and mentioned nothing about grammar. As for it being a start class article, I fail to see the relevance of the class of article when it comes to disruptive activity. You can be disruptive in stubs too. freshacconci (✉) 03:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

This is not disruptive. Many articles see improvements more substantial than this without so much effort and debate.--2602:304:CF02:C940:9C01:D1C6:40F4:C604 (talk) 04:15, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

It would be nice if you knocked it off. freshacconci (✉) 04:24, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

However, adding the citation needed tag to the lead was disruptive. Move on. freshacconci (✉) 04:24, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

artforum as a source

Came here because this page is marked as needing immediate attention in the Wikiproject visual arts template. The citation Now Gallery, Artforum 03-1985. fails verification. I have a subscription, and access to all past issues, including the March 1985 issue. There is absolutely no mention of Tylicki or Now Gallery in that issue. Mduvekot (talk) 18:40, 18 October 2017 (UTC)