Contents

Talk:Assemblage (art)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles Smithsonian Institution: Archives of American Art Low‑importance This article is within the scope of Smithsonian Institution WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Smithsonian Institution and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Smithsonian InstitutionWikipedia:GLAM/Smithsonian InstitutionTemplate:WikiProject Smithsonian InstitutionSmithsonian Institution-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Archives of American Art.

I don't agree with this definition completely, but I'm not the one to edit it. Assemblage the 3D cousin of collage? Even in the Wikipedia article for collage it states that a collage is a type of asssemblage. Therefore assemblages can be 2D. Hey in fact be 2D. If not, it is surely close.

In my opinion, the first paragraph seems to contradict the first sentence of the next. Not having sources or even a strong knowledge base (it's just an observation) I'm not going to change this, but if anyone who does have a good concept of modern art looks at this I implore you to consider.

I am an assemblage artist and gallery owner and intend to edit this article in good faith and a neutral point of view.

  Bfpage |leave a message  11:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NFCC#1, a nonfree image may not be used when a free image serving the same purpose is available. Here, It is obviously not necessary to use a nonfree image to provide an example of an assemblage, since a free image of an example is already in the article, there is no claim it is not suitable, or that the nonfree image is not replaceable. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 11:34, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Drop the stick - WP:STICK clearly the Rauschenberg should stay in the lede of this article. It remained as the lede for 10 years, and it is a Major defining work of the subject. This is ridiculous...Modernist (talk) 11:55, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since you make no attempt to explain why the image is not replaceable, and alternative free images are available, it's clear you believe your own aesthetic preferences override NFCC policy. That's a dead end. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:02, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Stop your outrageous violation of Wikipedia:Harassment against me and the visual arts...Modernist (talk) 12:11, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• EdHR.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Robert Rauschenberg, Rhyme (1956) (38668628735).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:09, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]