Talk:History of ceramic art: Difference between revisions

• This article desperately needs to be either expanded or merged with Pottery. 22:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)Kraken of the Depths

• The use of this stub for all ceramic articles is far too limiting. As ceramics covers many disciplines this should be reflected in the stub. Suggest amending it to better reflect this. (unsigned post 16:55, 17 December 2006 by User:82.2.53.37)

Well, something needs to be done, so...

• ..I've made a start on expanding - could be a good article eventually... HeartofaDog 01:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
• I added a little based on my encyclopedia's definition of "ceramic art" ...By the way, the "Ceramics and pottery stub" uses this page to put topics about things made out of clay or porcelain so this page is important to the art world. Please do not merge with pottery, as there are ceramic figurines, small statuettes and works of art, that are not spun on the wheel like pottery is. Thank you in advance, Goldenrowley 03:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Correcting, improving, expanding etc ...

Hello HeartofaDog,

Thank you for your message. There is a need to improve the “ceramics-stub” as it is currently being used inappropriately and appears to have been casually attached to articles of little relevance. For example, two articles from which I removed the stub are:

• Engineering ceramics – the production of articles such as ballistic protection plates and the nose cones of rockets is nothing to do with art pottery or decorative arts
• J. & G. Meakin – this company produced tableware, and I struggle to see how plates, mugs, cruet sets etc. can be classed as decorative arts. However should there be a Wikipedia policy of classifying such as decorative, and however much this is illogical, it should be more clearly explaned

I can think of four ways of resolving the current misuse are: 1. Only use the stub for art related ceramic articles 2. Re-write the [ceramics (art)] 3. Direct the stub to a disambiguation page such as [ceramic] 4. Direct the stub to [ceramics]

A re-write of [ceramics (art)] is needed anyway as there are errors, including: 1. ‘Ceramic art can be either made by hand or manufactured’ Items made by hand are, by definition, manufactured 2. ‘in most cases, ceramics various types of clay - processed, shaped and heated that can be molded.’ It is far too much of a generalisation to state ‘most cases’ 3. ‘ancient word Karamos, meaning "potters clay."’ More specifically it’s Greek, and also the correctly spelling is keramos 4. ‘Ceramic materials take the form of either pottery (earthenware) or porcelain.’ is a grotesque simplification. Even for whiteware ceramics this ignores many different body types, and what about non-whiteware ceramics? 5. I personnally struggle to accept that ‘The oldest known ornamental ceramic in the world is the Venus of Dolní Věstonice’ as how is it possible to know the article was made to be ornamental. It may, for example, have been made for religious reasons; however it is not possible to know

Thanx,Theriac 13:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)