This template 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
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
This template is becoming rather unwieldy? I suggest removing some of the more loosely related subjects, like his grandson (only born afte Rubens' death, so no importance for Rubens)n the link to Dutch Golden Age Painting, and the "Related" and "Public Collections" sections, which could be nearly endless (he worked for many, many patrons, and his works are in many, many collections and such a list should certainly include the Louvre and the Hermitage). The link to Rubenshuis (which should remain) can be moved to the family section, as it was the family house. Fram (talk) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not agree, like this it is a very good vieuw of all Rubens related articles, and promotes the knoledge of his life and important family.--Carolus (talk) 10:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Someone like his grandson really wasn't important though in his own right, and not important for PP Rubens at all, and some of the others seem like utterly random selections (why these collections and not others? Why these patrons and friends and not others?). Fram (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
you are very unpatient, i do not have the time to clean up the mess of the past, you only give critic and do nothing at all. --Carolus (talk) 11:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
? I haven't said that the problems are your fault, or that you need to clean them up? I started a general discussion about this template, which I have neglected for too long. I could have done something and simply implemented my preferred changes, but I have a feeling that you wouldn't have liked this. Instead, I started a discussion here to have input about this template, not to attack an editor or to get attacked by an editor (FYI, I was editing the template already in 2013...). Fram (talk) 12:22, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that (like Template:Rembrandt) this had been getting too long. Major, prolific artists should not have a "Public Collections" section, except for dedicated museums as in Template:Pablo Picasso, and so on. Johnbod (talk) 13:10, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WAY TOO much paintings, i don't know how much he did paint, but this might become rediculous.--Carolus (talk) 13:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But the paintings are what he is famous for, not the family members or places he lived or collections which now display these very paintings. Perhaps the paintings need to be subgrouped (by date or by genre). Fram (talk) 06:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
