- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. 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 14:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
René Moncada edit
- ... that artist René Moncada believes that a child wouldn't consider an image of a vagina as obscene unless influenced to think so by someone else?
- Comment: There IS an image coming (for this hook; of one of the artists wood-carved vaginas) but I'm going to begin this DYK process without it. Also, this is a thorough article but heavy with pre-internet sources, so I'd like to officially vouch for all facts from the start because I possess the hardcopy and have direct knowledge of the facts and events presented here. And anyone who knows my contributions ought to know I have no need to neither cut-&-paste, plagiarize or make up information. If anything I may be guilty of over-packing it with references, so: trim if you must. I'm willing, ready and able to spend as much time with this as necessary.
Created by Penwatchdog (talk). Self nominated at 15:15, 9 October 2013 (UTC).
ALT hooks:
- 1: ... that artist René Moncada's Sex and Violence depicts a Christian cross with a vagina at its center? (possible image TK)
- 2: ... that artist René Moncada claimed a ventilation grill at the Museum of Modern Art as his own work on permanent display? (no image)
- 3: ... that artist René Moncada's I AM THE BEST ARTIST Rene murals of the 1970s are recognized as an early act of "art provocation"? (image available from commons, already at I AM THE BEST ARTIST Rene)
May I politely inquire why this is being bypassed and left languishing here? Touchy subject matter? Anything? All comments appreciated. Or will this nominee just end up being deleted after sitting here ignored long enough? Patiently awaiting, but other things to move along to. Penwatchdog (talk) 04:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Needs full review. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:17, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
- I began reviewing but I got stumped by the requirement for checking for too-close paraphrasing and copyright violation, because the sources are offline. Frustrating! Binksternet (talk) 01:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Understandable, Binksternet. The article relies heavily on analog sources but far as I'm aware, I don't think that's un-permissible. What-to-do~? Don't know how much "good faith" is accountable in DYK but I continue to stand by my sources; specifics provided. There's also one online New York Times article presented in the references which touches upon most of the major points of the article; does that provide extra credibility? (Rene feuding with another artist about a wall; "Le Pointre") The "SoHo" book source also: only partially accessible online but I've provided all pertinent specs. Three other sources from which a bulk of the article pulls are surely accessible by those with the access: Village Voice, New York Press, Screw magazine; all reliable with specifics provided (Screw as well being more reliable than one might consider). I have no vested interest in this except to say I believe this to be a subject of interest to have been worthy of my (considerable) time, with notability worthy of inclusion here; seems like it may have to come down to good-faith with this one. Anyone willing to provide insight/comment as to all the above, please.
By the way, I was hoping to provide an image for this nomination, but that may not happen; the artist seems to have concerns about what he wishes to display, though he's been kind enough to provide for the article, BUT: the photo in the article shows Rene wearing a version of the "Sex and Violence" artwork mentioned in the ALT 1 hook; it's usable and I've attached it here for consideration, though legibility may come into play. There may also be an image of one of his "wood-carved vaginas" being uploaded as I write this; we'll see. Penwatchdog (talk) 14:37, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Considering how many hastily or poorly reviewed DYK entries make it all the way to the Main page, it seems unfair to stop this well-written article because most of the sources are offline. I agree that a good faith assumption of no violations is going to be required for this to go forward. Let's see what others say... If nothing else happens I will review it as fully as I can. Binksternet (talk) 16:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Binksternet, while there aren't many sources that are accessible here, there are a few. A good check of those online sources should be sufficient for close paraphrasing, with AGF on the offline ones, just as we typically AGF on hook facts based on cited offline sources. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:05, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
/ 
The four hooks are all okay, the first two are accepted AGF, while the third and fourth are accepted by online source confirmation. The article date and length are suitable, and the referencing is thorough. The hooks are the right length. From the few online sources I was able to find that there is no problem with copyright violation or too-close paraphrasing. Personally, I have no preference for any one of the hooks; they are all fine with me. Binksternet (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Bluemoonset, will Binksternet have to settle on a hook? Or, will the choice be left to Administrators? If my preference is of any consequence, I'd like to propose (with slight alterations):
- withOUT image: original: ... that artist René Moncada believes that a child would not consider a representation of a vagina as obscene unless previously influenced to think so?
- WITH image: ALT 2: ... that artist René Moncada (pictured) claimed a ventilation grill at New York's Museum of Modern Art as his own work "on permanent display"?