This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles
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
I'm not a native Spanish speaker, but is there a better translation of Goya's quote that respects the negation aspect? I think there's a slight, but significant difference in meaning between, "I have had" and "I have had no other". Again, not a native speaker, but I think a more literal translation would be "I haven't had other masters than..." 2600:1700:2950:7B90:84:94CD:C69C:3B60 (talk) 06:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"he is generally considered one of the greatest visual artists in the history of art and the most important in Dutch art history" Either remove this sentence or assert the same in Michelangelo's page. That this ascription was removed from Michelangelo's page means that it can't be on any other artist's page. Adopt a set of consistent rules. Michelangelo is perhaps the greatest artist to have ever lived. Rembrandt is a dwarf compared to Michelangelo. And yet his opening paragraph asserts that he's one of the greatest visual artists in history, whereas Michelangelo's doesn't. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:30, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Rembrandt's portraits of his contemporaries, self-portraits and illustrations of scenes from the Bible are regarded as his greatest creative triumphs."
Who writes this bullshit? This article needs to be heavily toned down. In proportion, Rembrandt was a middling painter considering the talent that the era produced. Compare the introduction written to Caravaggio, without whom Rembrandt would not exist and who is at least ten times greater than Rembrandt, which is devoid of these subjective superlatives and bombastic statements.
I know that some Northern Europeans inflate Rembrandt's value for lack of many artists of high stature hailing from the regions, but the deification of this average painter in this article is heavily unwarranted. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 09:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
JAMA Ophthalmology published articles in 2018 and 2019, theorizing, then refuting, that both Rembrandt and Leonardo may have had undiagnosed exotropia (commonly, "walleye"), a type of strabismus—an eye misalignment. Exotropia typically leads to favoring one eye, leading to vision resembling those seen when painted on a flat canvas.
I've removed this section as WP:UNDUE (and it was placed far too high). All top artists are plagued by this sort of thing. Note that a) the journal backed down, and b) as usual it was in the Christmas issue of the journal, no doubt alongside the studies on which chocolates the nurses take first from mixed boxes. Johnbod (talk) 15:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]