Template:Did you know nominations/List of most expensive sculptures

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 13:13, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

List of most expensive sculptures +4[edit]

Self-nom by Violetriga (talk) at 23:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Many thanks for tackling this rather large job! violet/riga [talk] 22:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
  • It's a little difficult to find a true source because few prior lists exist, but I've added the one that inspired the article and does work as a source. violet/riga [talk] 22:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
  • The list is sourced from a November 2010 list. That is not so good. In the last year some valuable stuff may have sold.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
  • As no other such list is available it's rather hard to find a more modern source. A BBC News article from two days ago confirms that #1 is still #1 but beyond that it's hard to find details. It's also rather difficult to prove a negative, ie. that nothing has beaten any of these values. Thus we have to rely on the other sources used to build up a picture of the most expensive sculptures. I understand your reservations but the combination of all the sources does come together to provide what I would call sufficient evidence that it is correct. violet/riga [talk] 19:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
  • My problem is that if 4 of the top 5 came in 2010, I find it hard to believe that none of the top 10 have come in the last year.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
  • It does seem logical that there would be more recent ones, but art auctions have been dismal this year, perhaps detailed sufficiently here. Another list of the most valuable sculptures can be found here but it's undated so not much help. violet/riga [talk] 22:23, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Please include the August 2011 sales report in the article. Also, this type of list needs a note saying something like "Last updated with data through August 13, 2011"
  • Do we know whether any November or December 2010 sales were expensive?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
  • i have tried to clarify things a little more now. After lots of searching I can't find anything significant sold since the latest on this list, but there isn't really anywhere that explicitly states "no valuable sculptures have sold in 2011". I am also unable to find a list that is dated recently, probably because nothing has sold so there hasn't been a need for an update. violet/riga [talk] 08:44, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I remain a bit uncomfortable declaring this list to be current. The second source following the November 2011 claim in the table introduction does not have a publication date and does not include any information from 2011. I am going to leave a note at WP:WPVA and see what they say.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:16, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
  • The second source does include information from 2011. It's on the second page, with the most recent sale being May 2011. My inability to find a source that is more up-to-date is symptomatic of the lack of recent, higher value sales. violet/riga [talk] 18:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I wasn't sure how it would work with reviews. I'm working on a couple of other reviews at the moment. violet/riga [talk] 22:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Artemis and the Stag
Tête (sculpture)
Tete de femme (Dora Maar)
Grande tête mince
  • Comment Tony asked me to comment here on my talk. I've looked at the article & it seems a good piece of work. Such lists can be hard to source, & above all to keep updated. I thought we had a template to this effect to put at the top but I can see it. I think it is fine for DYK as it stands - this is not FAC after all. I think the "Art wolf" online source is the only one to provide an explicit list. I'm not sure this exactly an RS, but the individual items are sourced separately, & pure arithmetic is not WP:SYNTHESIS. Johnbod (talk) 03:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg With that expert opinion, I am satisfied that this meets our standards.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC)