Talk:Nicholas Hilliard

The Hungarian-language version of this article is Wikipedia's 10,000,000th! [1]

Untitled

The article says that Hilliard painted what is believed to be the first known self-portrait. Although a reference is linked to the name of the book in which this is found, I would like to know the evidence for this. The article on portraits speaks of Fouquet (15th century) as having painted a self-portrait, describing Hilliard's only as "one of the earliest known." There are also self-portraits earlier than Hilliard's as seen and/or mentioned in articles such as Perugino, Dürer and Titian, among others. InvisibleSun, 9/1/05

self portrait

You don't think he did the one of himself ae 13 in 1550???? WB2 00:50, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Man among flames

I've removed the very lovely "Man among flames" as Strong 1983:109 describes how the attribution moved from Oliver to Hilliard & back to Oliver, which he says was confirmed by technical examination. But the V&A website says Hilliard (rather an odd entry - what calligraphy?). Unless anyone knows differently, I think this is just a mistake. The image is grossly stretched in the vertical dimension btw.Johnbod (talk) 21:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Hungarian article on same artist is 10 Millionth

Those ten million articles have been written across 250 different languages. English is still the most popular language on Wikipedia, with 2.3 million articles (they reached 2 million English articles in September 2007). After English, the next most popular languages are German, French, Polish, Japanese, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, and Swedish. -says anon editor - moved from the article. Johnbod (talk) 17:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

the press release GameKeeper (talk) 17:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

More specifically, the Hungarian article on Nicholas Hilliard was the ten millionth article on Wikipedia. Congratulations on a job well done, Wikipedia editors! --pie4all88 (talk) 18:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I did wonder! Johnbod (talk) 18:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, it's only the Hungarian article that receives this honour. The English article was created at 11:41, January 15, 2005, and likely was somewhere in the 1.7 million total article range. -- Zanimum (talk) 20:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully the 20 millionth article will be some hilarious Internet meme or some really awesome fetish porn. Wîckérpédïå édïtø(r) (talk) 15:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure that Nicholas Hilliard Article was 9,999,999 or something, and that the 10 millionth is something of that kind. 76.69.173.86 (talk) 16:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you extrapolating from the current English/total ratio of 2.3 million out of 10 million for that guess? :p John Riemann Soong (talk) 22:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Szerencsekívánat! Congratulations! Glückwünsche! Félicitations! поздравления! 恭喜！ 축하합니다! Congratulações! ¡Felicitaciones! To the Hungarian Wikipedia, as well as to Wikimedia as a whole. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 20:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, this article was indeed officially the 10 millionth, no fudging around. I believe the office had our tech people monitoring it, unlike previous milestones. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Footnotes etc

I've tidied the references, and removed the 1911 Britannica marker - there are only two paragraphs of 1911 text left, and they're now both footnoted and have a comment in the text next to them to credir their author. I've created one additional reference, for Roy Strong (1969), English Icon: Elizabethan and Jacobean Portraiture - I think this is the correct edition, but if not please correct. The note in the text didn't specify.

The two ambiguous footnotes remaining are #17 (which just gives "Strong op. cit" - 1975, perhaps?) and #27, with no page numbers. If someone with the books could check on these, that'd be great!

Otherwise, a pretty good article - well done! Shimgray | talk | 13:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, that's the correct (only) edition of the The English Icon. I'll see of I can sort out the op. cit - Johnbod and I seem to have different (but overlapping) volumes by Strong in our libraries. - PKM (talk) 19:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

References fixed. - PKM (talk) 20:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Mystery gbook

What is this generous but malformed google books item? Does anybody know? [2] Published by Taylor & Francis, but no date (after 1958). Johnbod (talk) 02:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nicholas Hilliard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090909172904/http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/paintings/stories/Hilliard's_Young_Man/index.html to http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/paintings/stories/Hilliard's_Young_Man/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)