What is the background color? How is it set? -Wisekwai 17:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if someone could please post a key to the colors used on infobox. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 15:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. just to let you know, when dates are unknown, this template says "Born" and can't be used. Example here -Susanlesch 00:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated it so that it only displays "Born" (and the birthdate and location) if the birthdate parameter is populated. Ideally it would display "Born" if either the birthdate _or_ location parameters were specified, but my scripting skills don't extend that far! DH85868993 (talk) 14:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to add a 'website' parameter to this article for contemporary artists? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does one actually use this infobox? If one adds {{Infobox Artist}} one does not get any clue as to how to add any parameters to it. DuncanHill (talk) 00:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears transcluded usage info at Template:Infobox Artist/doc was vandalised. Fixed. Tyrenius (talk) 00:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - that makes much more sense now! DuncanHill (talk) 01:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly didn't make much before. I've protected the transcluded documentation page and semi protected this. You might like to watchlist it. Tyrenius (talk) 01:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and again many thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if someone could have a look at this, as the blue colour of the bar at the top does not appear automatically when the template is pasted as shown in the documentation. Tyrenius (talk) 04:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To get the default blue bar, omit the "| bgcolour = " line. DH85868993 (talk) 07:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Above copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (technical).

Template changed so code is in it now. Ty 04:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This template seems to create extra inter wiki links when used. Does anyone know about this template? Victuallers (talk) 22:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain in more detail? Ty 12:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bug was fixed on 22 February 2008. DH85868993 (talk) 13:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose changing this to "key works" or somesuch. Tyrenius (talk) 04:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Famous is surely a word we are supposed to avoid for several reasons; "key" would be better. All the headings in these boxes encourage inaccurate information - especially the "movement" one. I don't think the web-site should be included. Imho, much the most important point is to make it clear that no one is obliged to use this box, and that very often a work makes a better lead image. It would be good to get clear concensus on that. Johnbod (talk) 11:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about "significant works"? Not all important works by an artist are famous. The lesser known ones are often significant. --sparkit^TALK 04:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's necessary to decide what this field is for. I see it as highlighting a work or small number of works that would be useful for the reader to know about as a starting point to understand the artist's oeuvre. I'm trying for a neutral-sounding description, so the field will be equally useful in an article on a major historic artist and an article on a minor (but within wiki terms "notable") contemporary artist. Tyrenius (talk) 23:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose changing to simply "works". That allows flexibility and it's obvious that it will be just a selection of key/significant/important/representative works that will be included. Ty 12:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Also, there is a case for advising this should normally only be used to link to other articles; in theory these should normally be the most important. Johnbod (talk) 13:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there are separate articles on works, then they should be the priority inclusion, but, if not, then it would be useful in many cases to name some works. The removal of "famous" makes this more appropriate. Ty 04:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree...Modernist (talk) 11:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose changing "influenced by" to "influences", mainly to slightly shorten the length of the description (also to pair with "influenced"). Ty 12:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

better. "Style" is often better for earlier artists than "movement" too. Johnbod (talk) 13:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from above:

"Style" is often better for earlier artists than "movement" too. Johnbod (talk) 13:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give an example or two? Ty 04:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]