Talk:Group of Seven (artists)

Untitled

WHAT 9500!?!? There's No way that could be right! does anyone know how many pictures the Mc Michael gallery actually has? --Malco 141.117.152.214 (talk) 07:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't mean 9500 pieces from the Group of Seven, it means in total...it's just poorly written and not really relevant here. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

No, I checked the history, The number should be 6000, it was vandalized on 14:00, 15 January 2010 by Davisloe1. I fixed it though. -- Malco141.117.152.214 (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Frank Johnston didn't die in 1922 as this article states; he left the group in 1921 to become principal at an art school and to pursue commercial art. He died in 1949.

Andrew Riddles 13:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey all. Just a note: quite a lot of the group's style was inspired also by Scandinavian landscape artists. Some members even worked to bring this kind of work to the CNE's art exhibitions way back. I don't have any citations to help out, but all of this can be accessed by looking through CNE art exhibition programs in the CNE archives in Toronto. As well, the Scandinavian connection is noted in a few art history books on the group. JB —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.209.7.172 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

69.71.70.60 (talk) 16:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)nahhh

Image copyright problem with Image:Red Maple.jpg

The image Image:Red Maple.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

the Arctic

How about something like this:

After Samuel Gurney Cresswell and other painters on Royal Navy expeditions, these were the first artists of European descent who depicted the Arctic.Timmermann (talk) 11:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Needs images

Somebody do a search at wikimedia Elinruby (talk) 22:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 8 February 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Silikonz💬 20:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

---

Group of Seven (artists) → Group of Seven – Unnecessary disambiguation. The page Group of Seven was renamed in August 2022 to G7, the name which the economic group is much more commonly known by. While the title now redirects to the moved article, "Group of Seven" as a name much more commonly refers to the Canadian artists' group. The redirect now at this title has no significant history and can be deleted. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 00:06, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose: Too ambiguous. The G7 is still known as the Group of Seven, and most readers would be more familiar with the seven nations than the seven artists. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose – While it's possible that most readers here in Canada might first think of the group of artists, that's certainly not the case worldwide. The diplomatic forum is certainly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Graham (talk) 05:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per others, but I think Group of Seven should now be a disam page - the G7 has lost its primaryness. Johnbod (talk) 05:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

  Would its "primaryness" not be independent of whether the article is titled "G7" or "Group of Seven", per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, which says, The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary? Or is there something else that caused it to lose its status, in your view? Graham (talk) 05:56, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

  I just don't remember anyone calling it the "Group of Seven" for a long time - the form "G7" became the COMMONNAME well before the official change last year, no doubt driven by saving headline space. Johnbod (talk) 15:04, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

  "G7" may well be the common name for the diplomatic forum, but what does that have to do with whether "Group of Seven" is a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT? Graham (talk) 20:32, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

  Indeed, when I searched before posting the request, "group of seven" produced results exclusively for the artists' group. I got to page 15 of Google before giving up. Producing any results at all for the economic group requires adding a disambiguator, such as "group of seven country", and then the results produced still overwhelmingly use G7 as a common name with only a handful of the results expanding the title to the full "Group of Seven". Even that specific search term produced results for the artists' group on page 2. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

  From here, the eighth and ninth links provided by Google Search are for the group of nations, and the other search engines that I have checked show more results for the nations than Google does. My Google Search results use infinite scrolling rather than having numbered pages. The Free Dictionary provides only the meaning about nations, referencing the Collins Dictionary. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Clear primary redirect. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, WP:SNOW early close In ictu oculi (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal of criticism section

As per Wikipedia:Criticism#"Criticism", I believe the 'Criticism' section may be violating Wikipedia's undue weight and neutrality guidelines. It seems disproportionately negative compared to the rest of the article and there aren't enough reliable sources to support the claims. I propose removing the section.

The criticisms are either just art pieces that critique some aspect of Canadian society using the Group of Seven as a reference or broader statements about Canadian society. For instance, the statements that Canadian society at the time didn't value female artists is not related to the Group itself, and in fact runs counter to the fact that Emily Carr collaborated and was mentored by them. Andrew6111 (talk) 18:03, 5 October 2024 (UTC)