Talk:Ted Stamm/Archive 1

Archive 1

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (your reason here) --Vexations (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

The article may be too promotional, but the subject's work is represented in the collections of some pretty major museums, so he easily meets our notability criteria for artists. Vexations (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (your reason here) --Eashleyfox (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

This page is for a deceased renowned artist Ted Stamm and all the information is sourced properly.

It absolutely is not. Egregious copyright violations. Vexations (talk) 18:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Ted Stamm Photograph.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:23, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Subject is notable

In case there is any confusion about whether the subject of the article is notable, here is a list of sources compiled from all revisions of this article, and a few that I was able to find quickly that were never in there.

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]
• [6]
• [7]
• [8]
• [9]
• [10]
• [11]
• [12]
• [13]
• [14]
• [15]
• [16]
• [17]
• [18]
• [19]
• [20]
• [21]
• [22]
• [23]
• [24]
• [25]
• [26]
• [27]
• [28]
• [29]
• [30]
• [31]
• [32]
• [33]
• [34]
• [35] Vexations (talk) 19:29, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Copyrighted text was introduced into this article from the very beginning (namely from [36]/[37]), so I've had to delete all offending revisions of the article per WP:RD1, which unfortunately includes pretty much its entire history. Thanks to the efforts of JBchrch and MoonlightVector, the article has been cleaned and won't need to be deleted per WP:G12. clpo13_(talk) 20:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Author(s)

Hi @Vexations:. I saw an error so thought to report it to you. The author of the book is Alex Bacon only, other people are editors of the book. Some useful links for your persual (all credit Alex Bacon as the author: [38], [39], [40] Thanks. 2A02:C7C:1608:DE00:7058:2E99:ABD5:6E0C (talk) 13:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Vexations (talk) 13:38, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

COI tag (October 2021)

editors who contributed to this article include one of the authors of published texts on the subject https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eashleyfox&diff=prev&oldid=1050400671&diffmode=source Vexations (talk) 13:51, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Literature

Can these literature be added to the literature section? If not, what can be done so they can be added? Thank you in advance for your feedback.

1. Stamm, Ted. (1979). TED STAMM 8 Woosters. Publisher Galerie December, Düsseldorf, Germany. Print. Link: https://library.nga.gov/discovery/fulldisplay?vid=01NGA_INST:NGA&docid=alma993756253504896&context=L

2. Stamm, Ted. (2017). DRM 1980. Publisher Karma Gallery, New York, Sketchbook facsimile. Print. ISBN 9781942607663. https://www.artbook.com/9781942607663.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Recognition

Suggested revision: The NEA text is duplicated, please only should appear once, like this: the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)

CURRENT: Stamm received awards in Painting from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, Fellowship in Fine Arts (1983) and the National Endowment for the Arts National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), Fellowship in Painting (1981–1982).

SUGGESTION: Stamm received awards in Painting from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, Fellowship in Fine Arts (1983) and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), Fellowship in Painting (1981–1982).

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.49.44.173 (talk) 13:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Permanent Collections

Could this section be added? If not, what can be done so it can be added?

Permanent Collections

• The Aldrich Contemporary Art Museum, Ridgefield, CT
• Brooklyn Museum, Brooklyn, NY
• Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh, PA
• Louis Vuitton Foundation, Paris, France
• Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, NY
• Hall Art Collection, Derneburg, Germany; Reading, Vermont
• Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles MoCA, Los Angeles, CA
• Museum of Modern Art MoMA, New York, NY
• San Jose Museum of Art, San Jose, California
• Art Gallery of Western Australia, Perth, Australia

Please note: References at the bottom of the talk page.
(later moved here)

References

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk • contribs)

 DoneVexations (talk) 12:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk • contribs) Thank you and can you assist with these as well?

1. Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, NY This is shown in the "Work Cited" and written permission was given from the Guggenheim to use the image. The work is not shown on the website yet, it has been on a waiting list for years to be added. WORK CITED: Bacon, Alex (2018). Ted Stamm : Woosters. New York: Lisson Gallery. ISBN 978-0-947830-67-0. OCLC 1046076042. p14-15

2. Louis Vuitton Foundation, Paris, France https://www.fondationlouisvuitton.fr/fr/collection/artistes The artist list on the Louis Vuitton Foundation website is incomplete but the work in the collection is included in the Ted Stamm Catalogue Raisonne research project. Could this be the source? If not, how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk • contribs)

 Not done. There is no deadline, and verifiability is absolutely foundational to what we do here. We can wait until the Guggenheim and LV update their catalogues. If a reliable publication writes about a work in a collection, that would be acceptable, but I searched for those and found none. (BTW, please sign your posts)Vexations (talk) 14:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Can you provide what would be acceptable sources?

1. 1 at the Guggenheim, is shown in the "Work Cited" book above for #1 reflects the Guggenheim Stamm painting and is credited int he credits of the book index as well. Also written permission from the Guggenheim was granted to use the image in the book. Can you clarify what this source is not reliable?

1. 2 what would be acceptable source? Can you provide examples that are not specifically online links. It is published in many printed documents.

Thanks in advance 185.229.155.117 (talk) 14:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Work

Proposed word changes: See bolded below. #1 change “His” to “Stamm’s”, #2 Change "Stamm's" to "his" in the second sentence and #3 “basic” to “found”. #1 and #2 flow better and better grammar. #2 "found" is used in all the texts citing Stamm's objects. Can these be changed? If not, what can be done to make the changes?

Stamm's body of works developed in his lifetime became influential for artists coming of age in New York in the last forty years. Most of his works are inspired by found objects, personal experiences and daily activities, such as finding a shape on the street or focusing on formal structures on a baseball field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.49.44.173 (talk • contribs)

 Not done "found object" is problematic, because it needs to be distinguished from Found object, which has its own meaning that is different from how that term is used when discussing Stamm's work. I'd be more comfortable with something like "noticing a shape". Vexations (talk) 14:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback.

1. Thank you
2. I changed #2 above that was missed.
3. Please keep "basic objects," and do not remove the text that is there. It barely makes sense now that is how been so reduced by edits with out context.
4. Given that "conceptual" is in the work text, they should be repeated in the Introduction to give context to the article.
5. aleatoric techniques only relates to the series of work titled "Chance" none of the other series relate. So it should say, "Stamm used aleatoric techniques in his Chance series, by tossing a die, to determine the number of layers of black paint that a painting was to receive."

Thanks in advance 185.229.155.117 (talk) 15:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Literature reorder

Can the literature be ordering by name alphabetically and formatted consistently with the "To cite a book with a credited author" using the APA citation style if possible. Also please remove ":" they are not in the book titles. Also I corrected all the proper titled used in the references and all the URLs.

Can the URLS be added? I noticed they were removed.

To cite a book with a credited author cite book |last= |first= |author-link= |date= |title= |url= |location= |publisher= |page= |isbn=

Literature

1. Bacon, Alex. (2018) Ted Stamm Woosters. Publisher Lisson Gallery, DAP Artbooks and Cornerhouse Publishing, UK. ISBN 978-0-947830-67-0. OCLC 1046076042.
2. Bell, Tiffany and Jensen, Per. (1086). Ted Stamm Painting Advance 1990, Essay by Tiffany Bell and Curator Per Haubro Jensen. Publisher C.W. Post College, NJ.
3. Stamm, Ted. (1997). TED STAMM 8 Woosters. Published by Galerie December, Düsseldorf, Germany.
4. Stamm, Ted. (2017). Ted Stamm DRM 1980. Publisher Karma, New York. ISBN 978-1-942607-66-3. OCLC 989037412.
5. Frank, Peter. (1984). Re-Dact, An Anthology of Art Criticism. Publisher Willis Locker & Owens, New York. ISBN 093027900X.

Thank you in advance. 185.229.155.117 (talk) 15:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a few errors, that I made minor tweaks too live. The one book was done by Tiffany Bell, not Ted, It was after he passed away. Also the titles are very important to not have ":" in them. That is not in the title of the published sources and the capitals are also very important to keep in Initial caps.

Thank you in advance. 185.229.155.117 (talk) 15:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Introduction

Can the word "conceptual" be added from #1 and #2 the additional introduction sentences? If not, why not and what can be done to make them be in complaint? Please give as many details. Thank you in advance for feedback and time.

1. Ted Stamm (1944–1984) was a conceptual American artist.

Conceptual is mentioned in both of these texts:

• Major Magazine source: Ted Stamm Painting Advance 1990, essay by Tiffany Bell, curated by Per Haubro Jensen, C.W. Post College Catalogue, 1986
• Nonprofit Arts organization: Deleget, Matthew (2017) Ted Stamm Paintings press release, Minus Space non-profit 501(c)3 organization. Brooklyn, New York. https://www.minusspace.com/ted-stamm-paintings

2. His artwork is internationally recognized multi-faceted conceptual work collected by major museums[5][7]. Stamm worked and lived in Soho in downtown Manhattan in the 1970s through the mid 1980s [2][7].

All of this content is found and sourced in the these reference to Ted Stamm.

• Bio: "Ted Stamm Biography" (http://www.artnet.com/artists/ted-stamm-2/biography-links). Artnet.com. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
• Book cited: Bacon, Alex (2018). Ted Stamm Woosters. DAP Artbooks and Cornerstone Publishers. ISBN 978-0-947830-67-0. OCLC 1046076042. pp. 7–41.
• Press Release: Ted Stamm Press Release (2018) Lisson Gallery, New York. Retrieved 17 October 2021. https://www.lissongallery.com/exhibitions/ted-stamm. Retrieved 17 October 2021.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk • contribs)

 Not done. https://www.minusspace.com/ted-stamm-paintings is not bylined, no idea who wrote this; likely Deleget or Martinez, but without an author, no. Also, no press releases. Vexations (talk) 12:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk • contribs)

Undone updated comments.

Can these changes be made? If not, why not and what can be done to make them be in complaint?

1. Ted Stamm (1944–1984) was a conceptual American artist. (add the word "conceptual")

Conceptual is mentioned in this text:

• Book source: Ted Stamm Painting Advance 1990, essay by Tiffany Bell, curated by Per Haubro Jensen, C.W. Post College Catalogue, 1986

2. His artwork is internationally recognized multi-faceted conceptual work collected by major museums[5][7]. Stamm worked and lived in Soho in downtown Manhattan in the 1970s through the mid 1980s [2][7].

All of this content is found and sourced in the these reference to Ted Stamm.

• Bio: "Ted Stamm Biography" (http://www.artnet.com/artists/ted-stamm-2/biography-links). Artnet.com. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
• Bio: "Ted Stamm Biography" (https://tedstamm.com/bio) Retrieved 21 October 2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.49.44.173 (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Book cited: Bacon, Alex (2018). Ted Stamm Woosters. DAP Artbooks and Cornerstone Publishers. ISBN 978-0-947830-67-0. OCLC 1046076042. pp. 7–41.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.25 (talk • contribs)

 Not done "internationally recognized" is weasel wording. It is not clear at all that his work is multi-faceted. What are those different aspects. They're not mentioned anywhere in the article. "collected by major museums" is redundant. We list all the museums that verifiabily collected his work. "Soho in downtown Manahattan" is, well everybody knows that Soho is in London and SoHo is in Lower Manhattan.

I would politely like to disagree on all your feedback. Here is the rational:

1. 1. "Conceptual" is how all of Stamm's work is categorized universally? It is mentioned in dozens of online sources. What is the reason for not attributing that category? I did not see your feedback for this point.
2. 2. "Internationally recognized" means the world has been exhibited "internationally" and it has been "recognized" seen. It is common basic language, nothing to do with what you wrote. "International" means many countries, "recognized" means seen. Both in this context assist in the Introduction of the artist to the page. What other language would you like to use? I am suggesting the common language for this used on a vast amount of artist pages on Wikipedia. It is also sourced in relation to Stamm in many of sources mentioned above.
3. 3. Multi-faceted means many areas, for example: painting, works on paper, art books, graffiti, photography, performance. This is an art term used, which other art term would you suggest? This is used again in many of the sources.
4. 4. "collected by major museums", is not redundant because the introduction of the Wiki page should highlight sections of the page. That is what I have read it the read on Wikipedia's own guidelines and complaince. Therefore, the introduction should reflect aspects of the sections of the page. Can you explain what you would suggest in the introduction? All the examples I have seen from other deceased artists on Wikipedia do highlight the sections in the way I am suggesting.
5. 5 "Soho" exists both in New York and London. Also readers would not know Soho stands for in NY and "South of Houston", ie. downtown Manhattan. In the context of the artworld downtown Manhattan has a very specific meaning and very relevant. Again this is sourced in many of the texts.
6. "painting, works on paper, studies, art books, graffiti, photography, performance" needs to be somewhere. It is referenced in all the sources, please suggest where you would feel comfortable going? It references also #3 above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.229.155.117 (talk) 15:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you in advance 185.229.155.117 (talk) 14:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Do not accuse me of "due to lack of neutrality, inclusion and context". Withdraw that statement now. No personal attacks. Vexations (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you in advance185.229.155.117 (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC) Of course, withdrawn. I am just trying to make you very happy, also represent the subject in according to the sources all provided and make sure that a new reader can understand the context as well. The points above, please address each point within the work section. The remarks are also removed. Thank you in advance185.229.155.117 (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Clarification on my asserted lack of neutrality

I have no professional or personal connection to Ted Stamm, the estate of Ted Stamm, or galleries that sell or exhibit his work. I do not have a professional or personal relationship with people who curate, publish or market his work. I not affiliated with any organization that is involved in the dissemination of Stamm's work. I am not the author of published works on Stamm: I have never written about Stamm except in this article. I do not have access to archives or private information on Stamm. I do not own work by Stamm. I do not stand to benefit in any way, either financially or in my profession from my writing here. My career is in an entirely different field. I not a "fan" nor do I dislike the work. I strive towards accurately representing what independent, reliable sources have written about Stamm's work. Any assertion to the contrary is false and a violation of policy. Vexations (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree with all of Vexations’ actions on this talk page. JBchrch talk 15:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The comment was withdrawn though, it was in reflection to the feedback on specific words and language used. Not reflecting on the actual page topic at all. Only to do with the page text language context. Thank you in advance and of course withdrawn for any inference not intended to be in relation to the page topic. 185.229.155.26 (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2021

Please add missing citation: In the same year Stamm was included in the seminal, A Painting Show at MoMA PS1 in New York.

Change to: In the same year Stamm was included in the seminal, A Painting Show at MoMA PS1 in New York . Wikitreeroots (talk) 16:15, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Are you asking this on behalf of, or in coordination with the blocked editor Eashleyfox? If so, that is a form of sockpuppetry? I'm not convinced that it is good idea to refer to that show as "seminal". That more accurately describes an exhibition like Primary Structures. We don't even have an article on A Painting Show. The correct link would have been https://www.moma.org/calendar/exhibitions/4022 BTW. I had hoped that we could take some time to let this article cool off for a bit and then work on it later with editors who also have other interests than Ted Stamm and have some experience with editing Wikipedia artist biographies, but apparently something is urgent. One wonders why. Vexations (talk) 21:02, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

It's either Eashleyfox or somebody closely coordinating. I've blocked. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:56, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2021

Lots of sockery --Blablubbs (talk) 17:26, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
X ≈ Replace current section Work Stamm used aleatoric techniques, by tossing a die, to determine the number of layers of black paint that a painting was to receive. In 1974, Stamm started working with shaped stretchers, introduced the element of line into his paintings and created a new iconic series of work that he continued to develop throughout his life. Y ≈ With New suggestion Work In 1974, Stamm started working with shaped stretchers where he introduced the element of line into his paintings and created a new iconic series. These series were titled “Woosters” and “Dodgers” that he continued to develop throughout his life. The “Woosters” series is named after the street his studio was located on and based on a found object from the location. The “Dodger” series is based on the baseball team and structures related to the baseball field and abbreviation systems. The “Cancel” and Chance “Roll” series used aleatoric techniques, by tossing a die or rolling a roulette wheel, to determine the number of layers of black paint or type of black that a canvas or work on paper was to receive. Each series consists of paintings, works on papers and studies. His work also included documentations through photography of his street art he titled “Designators” at site-specific installations around New York City. 195.178.248.6 (talk) 14:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:16, 24 November 2021 (UTC) Wikipedia consensus usually occurs implicitly. An edit has presumed consensus unless it is disputed or reverted. How can this be further proven than the references themselves? The current work text is partial and would be improved by including the new suggestion, it is more complete and accurate to what is written in the articles. 217.116.228.14 (talk) 16:21, 24 November 2021 (UTC) I feel that it is likely that this is a continuation of the sockpuppet editing based on geolocation and prose provided. As such I'm closing the request. If an editor would like to take it upon themselves to add the prose, that is fine. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2021 (UTC) I am a new editor, not related to the Socketpuppet and would like to suggest the new work text above. How can I do so? 80.62.117.180 (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2021 (UTC) References

BLP primary sources

Removal request for the "BLP primary sources" the artist is deceased and all the links are external references. --Danesarehappy (talk) 14:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are saying, not at all. What does "external references" have to do with anything? Are you trying to get approval to use primary sources? What exactly are you asking? --Yamla (talk) 17:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 June 2022

Please edit x to y. X = Ted Stamm (1944–1984) was an American painter.

Y= Ted Stamm (1944–1984) was an American minimal and conceptual based artist. 87.49.45.46 (talk) 02:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

References

 Done Primefac (talk) 07:58, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac: Is the "Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 July 2022" request formatted correctly? If not, any suggestions?