Talk:Mikhail Bakunin

Pictures and infobox picture has no relations

Can you give any meaningful reason for reversion, @Czar:? Infobox using a picture of him, I added others in a multiple image section. Not even the same file used, but another upload (infobox using a close-up one, cropped; those added by me was in their original form). Also it isn't like there was never a repeating use of one image's other variants in wikipedia, many examples can be found in other wiki pages too. Please revert to contribution. Bakunin's these pictures are well known, yet, lesser known in details. Many people still don't know its year, yet alone the exact date. In fact, I even missed an important thing, and said 3 (instead, there are 4 of them).
Also, Bakunin's anti-semitism is well documented, isn't fragmental. In Archives Bakounine, edited by another anarchist (Lehning), especially his writing about Marx is fully anti-semitic. Guillaume in his foreword to Oeuvres used explicitly from this document (without naming it, and instead calling it as a "manuscript"), but Lehning published the full one.
Kemkhachev (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

As I said in my edit summary, we're already using a Nadar photo in the infobox. Adding three images from the shoot doesn't help illustrate anything new about the subject. czar 02:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

It's still not a violation, considering 1) multiple image is something useable (gallery is different), 2) it's from his~early Europe period, and especially from Paris, a relatively little known period. Bakunin visited Paris several times, but aside from his first visit (in 1840s), none were long ones. August 1862 visit, one mentioned visit from the late 1863 (that's not detailed much) en route to Florence, visit of November 1864 in where he met with Reclus brothers and Proudhon (before his death), all of them can be grouped under mini sections, and I propose it doing so. In that way not only it can be detailed (for example Woodcock mentions his meeting with Proudhon in 1864, gives some details), but also exact or narrowed dates usually ignored by writers and thus hard to find for regular readers may have been recorded. This will contribute to his biography, both visually and textually.
Kemkhachev (talk) 03:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I disagree that adding three more near-identical photos contributes any of the detail you just mentioned. I think you will be hard-pressed to find consensus otherwise. czar 03:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I know what I made, you don't need to sent it to me again.
His photographs taken during his visits are documents of it, and I can't think any other visual document to use, aside from the letters. For example, during his residence in Florence (1864), there was a portrait drawing of him that was done by Nikolai Ge. This drawing is missing, however, photograph used for it as model exists. How can this not be a contribution to his residence in Florence, for example? Even giving a correct date and place for a photograph (which I must remind you that these usually either weren't dated, or were dated with wrong years) is a contribution for casting out the wrong informations. Also, as I said, they can be grouped under subtitles. For example:
1) Biography
1.1) Early years
1.2) Europe (1843-1849)
1.2.1) University and Hegelian activities
1.2.2) Revolutionary activities (1848-1851)
1.2.2.1) Prague uprising
1.2.2.2) Dresden Uprising
1.2.2.3) Arrest and imprisonment (1849-1851)
1.3) Russia (1851-1861)
1.3.1) Imprisonment
1.3.2) Exile
1.4) Escape journey
1.4.1) Japan
1.4.2) US
1.4.3) Britain
1.5) Revolutionary activities in Europe (1861-1876)
1.5.1) London
1.5.2) Paris
.........
Most of the article's biography is relied on few sources. However, it can be developed. There are several biographies of Bakunin, and several articles on several topics of his life. It can turn into a detailed article, on his life, on his work, on his thoughts. And yes, if this will be done, adding several photographs contributes to it.
Kemkhachev (talk) 04:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)