Talk:Edgar Wind

Copyright Issue?

I've taken most of this from the referenced web article, which is copyrighted. I have not copy-pasted but the paraphrasing is not extensive. I have corroborated the information with a few other sources (I've only listed one, I will fix that soon). I also plan to add a few more sections (on his two most famous books) with information from other sources. My question is: what should I do? Should I delete the article? Wait until I have enough sources to rewrite the biographical information less unilaterally? Or is the "minimal paraphrasing" acceptable in the context? Thanks! Lewallen 04:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

From a pure copyright (and potentially ruining your day, sorry) perspective, when the entire secondary work is created solely from a first copyrighted work, even paraphrasing, it becomes a derivitive of that work and in this case a copyright violation, as the author has yet to submit the work as GFDL or public domain.

English translation: I'd remove it all and stub it, then try to work around the copyright issues before the stub is deleted.

Probably not what you were hoping for, sorry. Good luck though, hey? ~Kylu (u|t) 04:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Fixed the copyright issue! Lewallen 15:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

More Information about Wind's Academic Ideas

I do think this page could use at least a little more summary of Wind's academic ideas and general works. I'll try to get my hands on some good references, but in the meantime, if anyone else has any leads, please go ahead! Lewallen 15:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Please Help: Redirecting searches

How do I redirect the other capitalizations of Edgar Wind's name to this page? Right now anything but Edgar Wind returns the stub at Edgar wind, which should be deleted and sent here as well. Sorry for using another helpme tag, I'm having a hard time finding the best way to do this. Thanks in advance! Lewallen 16:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Redirect. Here, I'll do this one for you. :-) Cheers. Sasquatch t|c 16:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Lewallen 17:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Wind art historian or philosopher

Wind had a very solid training as philosopher, Warburg was very impressed with Wind because of his analytical intelligence. I think it is misleading to see him too strong in the iconological Panofsky mold. Wind is more like early philosophical Panofsky.--Radh (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

1922 Dissertation, P.·s first, Wind P.·s pupil, before P. himself was allowed to teach. Cassirer also Gutachter. Published in part some years later in art historical journal. 1929 Habilitation, Experiment und die Metaphysik, P. helped with the Verfahren. P. and Cassirer also Gutachter. Reprinted recently, Buschendorf, ed., suhrkamp, stw.--Radh (talk) 06:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

One knowledgeable Wikipedian has femoved as "unsourced" the opinion that Wind's book on renaissance philosophy is truely original.--Radh (talk) 03:17, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't help wondering how far Wind's Oxford lectures from 1955 onwards - which caused enormous excitement among undergraduates - though they were then held in the Playhouse (he had yet to graduate to the Sheldonian, in those days reserved for Archbishop Fisher and Mgr Ronald Knox) - helped influence the budding creative advertising men among their hearers to explore and play with iconography, and what, in later life, Wind might have thought of them. I remember a lecture in 1957 or 1958 in which he deconstructed the late Picasso pair of 'War' and 'Peace', shaking his head over the crudeness of the iconography and drily, in the end, preferring 'Peace'. What might he have done with 'The Petrol War is hotting up?'Delahays (talk) 13:59, 29 March 2014 (UTC)