Jump to content

Talk:Bust of Edward Snowden

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Category: Vandalism Category: Vandalism

[edit]

I am not sure that this category doesn't apply. To be sure, this statue was on a whole different order than garden variety vandalism. What do you all think? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 7&6=thirteen, Epicgenius. Perhaps Category:Graffiti and unauthorised signage then? Ceannlann gorm (talk) 13:37, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Could be those, too. It's trying to fit this into definitions where it does not neatly fit. I for one think that it is better to over-include then under-include. I also hope that the statue is not destroyed, as that itself would be Vandalism. But that's just my opinion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that fits too since it's unauthorized. Unfortunately, 7&6=thirteen, the statue is MIA. Epic Genius (talk) 13:51, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's removed to whereabouts unknown. Personally, I thought it was a great (albeit controversial, given the dual nature of Snowden and his actions) piece of art. The artists deserve our thanks. Coincidentally, it was done contemporaneously with the airing of the John Oliver HBO Last Week Tonight interview with Snowden (which I highly recommend). 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fox News reported that "[b]y evening, the bust was being held at Brooklyn's 88th Precinct pending an investigation." Maybe incorporate that into the article? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 15:17, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do.
FYI, interview with Snowden John Oliver HBO Last Week Tonight. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the Society of Old Brooklynites, founded in 1880, lack a Wikipedia page—although their first president has one—and perhaps lack media savvy in confining their outrage to a Facebook page. I don't know much about the SOBs: do they really have 5,000 members, and are they the official custodians of the Martyrs' Monument? If there is more reporting on their press release I will try to incorporate it. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One person's art is another person's vandalism. Even though this actually complemented the existing work in a respectful (opinion) way. But Snowden and his acts are controversial and double-edged; so there will be citizens who are affronted by the work and its placement. Some will (no doubt) call it a despicable act of desecration of a revered site and memory. (Just guessing on that. I could be the Old Brooklynites copywriter). 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I absolutely agree—it's been fascinating to learn about the Martyrs' Monument and the much-neglected historical episode it commemorates. While I do think the makers of this guerrilla sculpture were both very aware and respectful of that precedent, and yes, it's flippant and facile to dismiss their critics as "SOBs", I certainly respect their point. Is it right to superimpose Snowden's circumstances here? More Americans died as POWs on the harbored British prison ships than on the Revolutionary War battlefields. How many people today know that? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Should I go ahead and add the category then? Ceannlann gorm (talk) 17:09, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the Old Brooklynites should be secretly pleased that this important monument was rediscovered and made an homage to Snowden. I did not know about it or the tragic loss of life on these despicable floating prisons. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:19, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. It is or is not vandalism according to who you ask; in fact, it is more like unlicensed art, such as 5 Pointz. But apparently it fits into Category:Graffiti and unauthorised signage.

On another note, the article on the original Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument has a long history and extensive details, so any "desecration", such as a Snowden statue, is likely to attract at least some objectors. The monument was renovated just 8 years ago, so it wasn't forgotten all this time, though I must admit that as a New Yorker, I had never heard of the monument until a year ago. Epic Genius (talk) 20:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Particularly since its a crypt, as is now noted in the article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In that case the main Vandalism category may be more appropriate then. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 20:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution

[edit]

This footnote: "The monument's dedication plaque estimates that 11,500 prisoners of war died in the prison ships, but others estimate the number to be as high as 18,000 people" and its reference came from Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument. I forgot to put that in the edit summary, which was an inadvertence. Sorry. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures needed

[edit]

A free picture of the shrouding would be good. The hologram would also be a good addition if we can do it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I looked in Flickr. Unfortunately, no images of the sculpture or hologram can be legally transferred from there to Commons. Also, this image, which is "All rights reserved", is the same as Commons' File:Bust of Edward Snowden in Fort Greene Park, Brooklyn.jpg, but since we do have the permission through OTRS, that's the only image that I can find that can be freely used right now. Epic Genius (talk) 00:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working with the artists to make sure that the copyright release on the existing photo is solid and that the OTRS release gets completed. No other pictures of the bust are going to be possible, unless the artists decide to produce another one. I'm not sure what User:7&6=thirteen means by the "shrouding." —Tim Pierce (talk) 00:24, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Tim Pierce: Before NYC Parks took the statue down, they covered it in a blue bag, like this. Epic Genius (talk) 00:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not in a position to help on this, but it would be excellent to get permission for a shroud picture, as well that evening's hologram tribute. Excellent collaborative work here—the article is shaping up so nicely. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need to have a picture of the Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument to illustrate the 'scene of the crime'? Or is that gilding the lilly? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the readily-available Monument photos show the main pillar, not the stylidiae flanking it. I'm not sure a casual viewer would make the contextual leap from the large to small pillars easily, without a better graphic illustration of the latter.
Perhaps we could get an additional photo of the Snowden sculpture showing the whole pillar (and eagle), and another pic of that same pillar without the sculpture? But for now, I think we're OK Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stylidia

[edit]

Not being a fan of weedy first paragraphs, I consigned the "stylidia" reference to a footnote. But I'm having trouble verifying the word, which doesn't come up in online searches. Is it spelled right, this term for a peripheral column in a monument? Where did you find it? — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 03:59, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded it.
See Stylar: having the shape of an ancient style; resembling a pen, pin or peg. Random House Dictionary Unabridged (1967).
Compare Styliform: long, thin and pointed like a bristle. Encarta World English Dictionary (1999).
Style can designate the gnomon of a sundial. Stylidia is a plural form. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 09:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ha. "Stylidia" reminds me of one of those useful words you've never heard until it comes up at the Scripps National Spelling Bee final. Have always wondered, how much do those kids beat themselves up for missing them? ("If only I'd studied a LITTLE harder...") — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 13:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They do give you a list. Or they did back when I was in 4th or 5th grade, which was well into the last millennium (actually century, but the first iteration seemed more satisfying). I am sure that appearing at a national level is a high pressure event, like being a contestant on Jeopardy. And studying harder would not necessarily transfer over into performance. Pressure makes almost everybody explode, some more than others. I have a friend who won big there. She is a patent lawyer, and she is best remembered for her answer to Alex's question about the most interesting invention she had worked on. Most of that answer got bleeped. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least she "won big"... if I were nine years old and missed "stylidia", I might have been traumatized by Greek pillar-stones for life! —Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was ten years old and was disqualified from a regional spelling bee while spelling "sonnet". It wasn't that long ago actually. Now that this is mentioned, I'd like to point out that even my computer doesn't know how to spell "stylidia". Perhaps a meaning could be included in the article as a footnote? Epic Genius (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Moot, since 7&6=thirteen took "stylidia" out and replaced it with the phrase "ancillary pillar" ... all Talk here and no argument Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 18:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the phrase "ancillary pillar" explains it better. It would be pretty awesome, though, if we used words like "stylidia" and linked them to Wiktionary. More hits to Wiktionary, more traffic for us Wikipedians. Epic Genius (talk) 19:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI See Stylite and Simeon Stylites and the other saints who sat upon a pillar. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

[edit]

Congratulations on making it to today's listing on the "Did You Know..." section of Wikipedia Main Page. The process of making it the listing takes a bit of effort and involves the quick cooperation of many editors. All involved deserve recognition, appreciation, thanks and applause.

Best Regards,
  Bfpage |leave a message  14:59, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. FWIW, I piloted it very quickly through the DYK process (knowing which strings to pull is key), and did a large # of edits to it. It is (opinion) a quality product and addition to our encyclopedia. But it was a collaborative effort, and all involved deserve a big hand. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:08, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was one of the easiest articles to write and steer through DYK :) The article I QPQed, Luxembourg Freeport, is of far more relevance to our queer and terrible qualms, and redolent of the dark symbolism that characterises the way we live now. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:38, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are entitled to your opinion. Doing all this in a matter of days was out of the ordinary. Meanwhile, Luxembourg Freeport still sits in a queue, and it was started well before this article. Not that comparisons like this are relevant. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mega soz, I think I was briefly mindless when I wrote that. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:14, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We all have bad days. No worries. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What a great article! I hope authors will consider nominating this for good status once they feel it meets criteria. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Statue returned, artists fined $50 each

[edit]

Breaking news, the artists' lawyer Ron Kuby won the statue's freedom on May 6th. So it looks likely the public will have a chance to see the Snowden sculpture sometime somewhere in the future (venue TBA). Too late tonight for me to thoughtfully update the article, as I need sleep, but wanted the page's collaborators to know about it. Hat tip to Rachel Maddow on her show for alerting me to this development Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 04:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Artists identified

[edit]

It looks as if Wired (on May 8, 2015) identified Andrew Tider and Jeff Greenspan as the two NYC artists, after their names appeared in a police summons. Gizmodo also picked up the story. Who wants to update the article? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 23:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Statue of Edward Snowden which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • https://www.change.org/p/new-york-city-department-of-parks-and-recreation-return-the-edward-snowden-statue-in-fort-greene-park-brooklyn
    Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the offending footnote and notification. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 11:00, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bust...

[edit]

So, this sculpture is actually a bust and not a statue. Should the page be moved accordingly? ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:17, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@7&6=thirteen, Epicgenius, and Vesuvius Dogg: Pinging you three as editors of this article. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:18, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree it is a bust. I support such a move. epicgenius (talk) 23:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The page should simply be Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument 2.0 as is normal for works of art (a pair of not-to-be confused hatnotes could be added to this article and Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument, respectively). Then the Statue of and Bust of names can be redirects. Arlo James Barnes 00:23, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Arlo Barnes and Epicgenius: FYI, I've started a move discussion below. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Statue of Edward Snowden. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 09:15, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 February 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Statue of Edward Snowden → Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument 2.0 – First of all, this is not a statue. The subject is a bust. Also, Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument 2.0 is the artwork's official title. Related discussion at Talk:Statue_of_Edward_Snowden#Bust... --Another Believer (Talk) 01:36, 16 February 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Jerm (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 support per reasons listed in the request. Arlo James Barnes 03:36, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We generally don't use official names. What is the common name? I would mildly prefer this be renamed and moved to Bust of Edward Snowden. Doug Mehus T·C 15:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Dmehus said it right. It is inconsequential in any event. There should be a redirect between them. Some call it a spear, some call it an arrow. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:35, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) It's true that we don't necessarily use official names, unless of course the official name is also the common name. It all depends upon how reliable independent secondary sources refer to the subject. It would help if the nom and supporter would give some examples of this. PI Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 15:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bust_of_Edward_Snowden&oldid=1206491855"