Template:Vital article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anthropology C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Arts C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.ArtsWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsTemplate:WikiProject ArtsWikiProject Arts articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Culture C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture 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.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Visual arts C‑class 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 C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Template:WP1.0

New Dreams (talk) 12:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replace the section title 'literary arts' with 'language arts'.

 Not done Please explain why you want to make this change. Theroadislong (talk) 12:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the document due to it needing a citation of the definition of 'the arts'. Although having many hyperlinks to words in the definition it fails to prove its statement and would require a reader to look at many sources in order to fully conceptualize 'the arts'.

Manon1998 (talk) 08:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to link 4 items in the 1st paragraph under the HISTORY section:

Last sentence of text reads: "This is evident in, for example, the art of India, Tibet and Japan. Religious Islamic art forbids iconography, and expresses religious ideas through geometry instead."

"India", "Tibet", "Japan", and "Islamic" link to general articles about each, rather than relating to the actual topic (i.e. "Islamic art", "Tibetan art", "Japanese art", and "Islamic art"). Linking directly to those 4 specific subcategories of art forms from this page would be more helpful to the reader, in my opinion.

Source text would thus read:

This is evident in, for example, the art of India, Tibet and Japan. Religious Islamic art forbids iconography, and expresses religious ideas through geometry instead. Johnrobinrt (talk) 22:49, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 23:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the "Classifications" section under "HISTORY", the first sentence, where it reads:

"...were taught in universities as part of the Trivium, an introductory curriculum involving grammar, rhetoric, and logic..."

Recommend you append after logic, "(also dialectic)".

Justification:

The word "logic" is hyperlinked to the article on logic. However, in the article on the Trivium (also linked here), the logic originally part of the Trivium is called dialectic. In the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium, under "Description" section, the division "logic" is introduced with "(also dialectic)", so my suggestion is based on following the same style as that article so the reader can see the link between "logic" as a broad field and the specific topic as it was originally known within the Trivium. Johnrobinrt (talk) 00:11, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: I narrowed the Logic Wiki-Link to point to the Logic article's History section on informal reasoning and dialectic.  Spintendo  09:21, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• The Arts Collage.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The arts → Arts – WP:THE gives two conditions which usually have to be met for an article title to begin with "The":

1. If a word with a definite article has a different meaning with respect to the same word without the article.
2. If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text.

Neither of these applies to "the arts" as a term. A distinction does need to be made between the arts and art, but those are already different words. As far as I can see the rationale for this article's title has never been discussed on the talk page, but it seems to have been so that the article titles "The arts" and "Art" would be as visually different from each other as possible. I would argue that "Arts" and "Art" are sufficiently different from each other, and better meet our naming conventions.

This has come about because of this proposal at CfD to rename Category:Arts to Category:The arts – partly for consistency with this article's current title, and partly because the phrase "in the arts" appears in other category names. However, I don't see any inconsistency between "Arts" as the title of an article or category, and using "the arts" where the term doesn't appear at the beginning of the title; WP:THE comes into play in the former case and not the latter. As this article's title is so important to that CfD discussion, I think it at least needs to be discussed. Ham II (talk) 10:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging BrownHairedGirl, Dimadick, El cid, el campeador, Grutness, Johnbod, Marcocapelle, Oculi and Peterkingiron, who've been involved in related CfD discussions; I'll also post this at WT:THE. Ham II (talk) 10:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]