Template:Did you know nominations/Picture for Women

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 BlueMoonset (talk) 01:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Picture for Women[edit]

A Bar at the Folies-Bergère, an 1882 painting by Édouard Manet

Created by Freshacconci (talk). Self nominated at 19:41, 1 September 2013 (UTC).

Symbol voting keep.svg An interesting, well-written and informative addition to the encyclopedia. Well researched with good references. I made links to various museums mentioned because I think readers would want them. Subject to fixing the following small things, the article is good to go:

  • The Melbourne University link (Naomi Merritt) is broken.
  • Add a reference in the lead to verify the main point about the work referencing Manet (the Tate reference would work or the ones used in the “Description” section.)
  • Some other references to particular claims would help. For example, citations needed for: “Wall considers Picture for Women to be his first success in challenging photographic tradition” and “Wall has been a key figure in Vancouver's art scene since the early 1970s.” Presumably a number of the sources verify these claim. The sources are already in the article but they need to be connected to the claims.
  • It would be good if the David Campany book were added to the Afterall article, especially since this is mentioned in the lead.
  • Why is reference #11 appearing all in italics? Can’t work it out.

And finally,

  • has a QPQ review been done?

Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

  • I've never submitted an article for DYK before so I'm not sure if I'm now supposed to respond or just wait for other comments, if any. But in any case, thank you for your notes. They are very useful and fair. I will work on making those changes today. freshacconci talk to me 14:21, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • The Melbourne University link (Naomi Merritt) is broken. Fixed
  • Add a reference in the lead to verify the main point about the work referencing Manet (the Tate reference would work or the ones used in the “Description” section.) Done
  • Some other references to particular claims would help. For example, citations needed for: “Wall considers Picture for Women to be his first success in challenging photographic tradition” and “Wall has been a key figure in Vancouver's art scene since the early 1970s.” Presumably a number of the sources verify these claim. The sources are already in the article but they need to be connected to the claims. Done
  • It would be good if the David Campany book were added to the Afterall article, especially since this is mentioned in the lead. Done
  • Why is reference #11 appearing all in italics? Can’t work it out. Fixed
  • As you have fewer than five DYK credits, you are exempt from the QPQ requirement. I've taken the liberty of adding an image, which boosts the profile of your hook, usually with a corresponding increase in the number of people viewing your article. If you'd rather not use the image, just say so. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 19:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Using the Manet image is a great idea. It never occurred to me. I didn't include an image in the proposal as the Wall image is non-free -- I'm guessing that would never fly on the main page. Thanks! freshacconci talk to me 14:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg Article good to go now. The first appearance of the Merritt link was also bad so I replaced it with your revised version. Now the full link is there twice, so you could if you wanted, remove the link component from the "Notes" section and leave it in the "References" section. Up to you. I enjoyed learning from this article about the Manet re-manifestation. I asked about the QPQ because I had forgotten to do it myself earlier. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2013 (UTC)