Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Naked woman climbing a staircase: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
re
Re
Line 52: Line 52:
::::::'''ALT2:''' ... that [[Joan Miró|Miró's]] 1937 '''''[[Naked woman climbing a staircase]]''''' ''(pictured)'' reversed the concept of [[Marcel Duchamp|Duchamp’s]] 1912 ''[[Nude descending a staircase]]''? --[[User:Epipelagic|Epipelagic]] ([[User talk:Epipelagic|talk]]) 08:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
::::::'''ALT2:''' ... that [[Joan Miró|Miró's]] 1937 '''''[[Naked woman climbing a staircase]]''''' ''(pictured)'' reversed the concept of [[Marcel Duchamp|Duchamp’s]] 1912 ''[[Nude descending a staircase]]''? --[[User:Epipelagic|Epipelagic]] ([[User talk:Epipelagic|talk]]) 08:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
::::::* So we have iconic photography involved in an iconic duchamp painting inspiring an important work by the iconic Catalan artist and we have expert sources linking these together and an article that explains that. The accusation seems to be that we have added this gif just to catch the readers eye. Ummm yes thats why we have a picture on the lead dyk. As neither of the other pictures are out of copyright then its the only option. I must admit I chose the gif over static picture. If you believe that Kippelboy (who is the Wikipedian in Residence at a Catalan Art Gallery) has created this article without any justification then we need to pull the article, not the hook. If we need to extend the hook to be "DYK that Miros painting was inspired by Duchamps that was inspired by these photos" then I guess we might haver to although I was told that if A caused B abd B caused C then A caused C. (Other points about it being just about 1500 chars or that some of the translation needs finessing are too minor as they can be easily fixed) Can I suggest that changing the hook to avoid criticism is shirking responsibility. If we know this is wrong then we need to pull the article and tell Miro's foundation that they are mistaken. Do we have another Spanish speaking art expert who can investigate? [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 09:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
::::::* So we have iconic photography involved in an iconic duchamp painting inspiring an important work by the iconic Catalan artist and we have expert sources linking these together and an article that explains that. The accusation seems to be that we have added this gif just to catch the readers eye. Ummm yes thats why we have a picture on the lead dyk. As neither of the other pictures are out of copyright then its the only option. I must admit I chose the gif over static picture. If you believe that Kippelboy (who is the Wikipedian in Residence at a Catalan Art Gallery) has created this article without any justification then we need to pull the article, not the hook. If we need to extend the hook to be "DYK that Miros painting was inspired by Duchamps that was inspired by these photos" then I guess we might haver to although I was told that if A caused B abd B caused C then A caused C. (Other points about it being just about 1500 chars or that some of the translation needs finessing are too minor as they can be easily fixed) Can I suggest that changing the hook to avoid criticism is shirking responsibility. If we know this is wrong then we need to pull the article and tell Miro's foundation that they are mistaken. Do we have another Spanish speaking art expert who can investigate? [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 09:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

:::::::*Yes, there's iconic photography which inspired an iconic Duchamp painting. But we have no evidence that the Duchamp inspired Miró. No, we do not have expert sources which assert a link between them at the time of creation; only what appears to be a modern comparison. And no, we do not have an article which factually explains it with proper sources. Yes, the only apparent reason for the gif to be in the article is to get ''some'' free image on the Main Page, even though it's entirely irrelevant to the article. No one said the article was created "without any justification". Extending the hook as suggested wouldn't work because, again, there's no evidence that the Miró was inspired by the Duchamp. And a hook should not be convoluted simply to justify the addition of an irrelevant image. Thanks to Victuallers for doing some cleanup on the article (as well as some by Epipelagic and myself). It started out looking like a very bad, unedited automated translation. Changing the hook would not be merely to "avoid criticism", but to avoid saying something which is not supported as factual by the source. I don't know why you keep mentioning pulling the article. And no one suggested that the Miró Foundation was mistaken; only that their casual remark has been extrapolated in a way which is not supported by what they actually said. [[User:Mandarax|<font color="green">M<small>AN</small>d<small>ARAX</small></font>]]&nbsp;<font color="blue">•</font>&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandarax|<font color="999900"><small>XAЯA</small>b<small>ИA</small>M</font>]] 20:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

*No Fair-Use images on main page or DYK; removed. [[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 09:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
*No Fair-Use images on main page or DYK; removed. [[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 09:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
::You're feeding my paranoia - the photographer died in 1904.... and what was removed? [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 09:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC) Oh I see ... someone had included a pic for illustration above that you removed thinking it may get onto the main page ... I'll have to look elsewhere to feed my persecution complex :-) thx [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 09:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
::You're feeding my paranoia - the photographer died in 1904.... and what was removed? [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 09:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC) Oh I see ... someone had included a pic for illustration above that you removed thinking it may get onto the main page ... I'll have to look elsewhere to feed my persecution complex :-) thx [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 09:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:21, 30 September 2011

Naked woman climbing a staircase

Woman descending the stairs

Created/expanded by Kippelboy (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 17:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hook review
Format Citation Neutrality Interest
Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk)


Article review
Length Newness Adequate
citations
Formatted
citations
Reliable
sources
Neutrality Plagiarism
Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk) Epipelagic (talk)


  • Seems okay AGFing for the offline sources and with the alternate tweak to the hook...
ALT1: ... that inspiration behind Miró's 1937 Naked woman climbing a staircase came from photos of a woman (pictured) descending a staircase? --Epipelagic (talk) 01:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • I've struck the hooks as they're incorrect. The article claims that Duchamp's painting – not Miró's drawing – alluded to the photographs of the woman. There is really absolutely no reason to have the gif or the text related to it in this article. The article just barely meets the minimum length requirement, and if that text were removed it would be under. I fixed some things in the article which were wrong or didn't make sense, but problems remain. For example, the first sentence of the Description section: "The work shows a woman with a long drawn drama and realism with an overly large nose which leaves some small bumps or horns." MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 02:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • I restored the hooks you struck, Mandarax, since your claims are not altogether correct. The source for the claim that the Miró painting is based on the Duchamp painting comes from the Joan Miró Foundation, who say "In this representation of a woman climbing a staircase, Miró reversed the concept of Marcel Duchamp’s Nude descending a staircase." The source for the claim that the Duchamp picture is based on the photos is the biography of Duchamp by Tomkins, which is not available online. That is why I AGFed the nomination.
The sentence you mention certainly seems nonsensical (with modern art who knows). It is sourced to a Spanish book which again is not online, and presumably must be AGFed in the absence of good reason do otherwise. Anyway, I've tweaked the alt hook and replaced the offending sentence with something that should not be controversial. --Epipelagic (talk) 04:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • (Sorry for the dueling icons, but I want to make sure this doesn't accidentally get moved to Prep while it's still disputed.) I had seen that source (I had even corrected the citation), but it looked to me merely like the author's comparison of the works. It does not say that Miró was influenced by, or even aware of the existence of Duchamp's painting. I wasn't disputing the claim about Muybridge's influence on Duchamp, and that should certainly be in the article about his painting, but it doesn't belong in this article. And even if a source is found which states that Miró knew of and was influenced by the Duchamp, the hook would still be misleading at best. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 07:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Okay, though it's most unlikely Miró was unaware of Duchamp's painting. But we are only arguing about the hook. What about
ALT2: ... that Miró's 1937 Naked woman climbing a staircase (pictured) reversed the concept of Duchamp’s 1912 Nude descending a staircase? --Epipelagic (talk) 08:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • So we have iconic photography involved in an iconic duchamp painting inspiring an important work by the iconic Catalan artist and we have expert sources linking these together and an article that explains that. The accusation seems to be that we have added this gif just to catch the readers eye. Ummm yes thats why we have a picture on the lead dyk. As neither of the other pictures are out of copyright then its the only option. I must admit I chose the gif over static picture. If you believe that Kippelboy (who is the Wikipedian in Residence at a Catalan Art Gallery) has created this article without any justification then we need to pull the article, not the hook. If we need to extend the hook to be "DYK that Miros painting was inspired by Duchamps that was inspired by these photos" then I guess we might haver to although I was told that if A caused B abd B caused C then A caused C. (Other points about it being just about 1500 chars or that some of the translation needs finessing are too minor as they can be easily fixed) Can I suggest that changing the hook to avoid criticism is shirking responsibility. If we know this is wrong then we need to pull the article and tell Miro's foundation that they are mistaken. Do we have another Spanish speaking art expert who can investigate? Victuallers (talk) 09:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes, there's iconic photography which inspired an iconic Duchamp painting. But we have no evidence that the Duchamp inspired Miró. No, we do not have expert sources which assert a link between them at the time of creation; only what appears to be a modern comparison. And no, we do not have an article which factually explains it with proper sources. Yes, the only apparent reason for the gif to be in the article is to get some free image on the Main Page, even though it's entirely irrelevant to the article. No one said the article was created "without any justification". Extending the hook as suggested wouldn't work because, again, there's no evidence that the Miró was inspired by the Duchamp. And a hook should not be convoluted simply to justify the addition of an irrelevant image. Thanks to Victuallers for doing some cleanup on the article (as well as some by Epipelagic and myself). It started out looking like a very bad, unedited automated translation. Changing the hook would not be merely to "avoid criticism", but to avoid saying something which is not supported as factual by the source. I don't know why you keep mentioning pulling the article. And no one suggested that the Miró Foundation was mistaken; only that their casual remark has been extrapolated in a way which is not supported by what they actually said. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 20:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • No Fair-Use images on main page or DYK; removed. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
You're feeding my paranoia - the photographer died in 1904.... and what was removed? Victuallers (talk) 09:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC) Oh I see ... someone had included a pic for illustration above that you removed thinking it may get onto the main page ... I'll have to look elsewhere to feed my persecution complex :-) thx Victuallers (talk) 09:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Hehe. Does your complex want some gudeg? It's fairly clear that it was intended by the poster to reach the main page (the (pictured) is still up there). Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC)