Talk:Modern Art Foundry

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

More sources[edit]

--evrik (talk) 01:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following 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 The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that the Modern Art Foundry specializes in working with artists who create limited edition works, usually intended for museums and galleries? Evelly, Jeanmarie. "See Inside The 85-Year-Old Astoria Foundry Where Famous Sculptures Get Made". Astoria & Long Island City. DNAinfo. Retrieved 2017-05-19.

5x expanded by Evrik (talk). Self-nominated at 01:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • Earwig finds a minor overlap, soon fixed, please see here. Review on pause. Moonraker (talk) 11:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

for ALT1, which is referenced from an online source. Five times expanded, well-cited, neutrally written, Earwig now finds nothing, QPQ done. The licensing of the image seems to focus on the statue and not the photograph, if evrik is the photographer it might be helpful to say who the photographer is and that there is a Creative Commons licence on the photograph. for main hook, as the source refers to "small editions", which are really not the same thing as "limited editions". But that could be fixed. Moonraker (talk) 16:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Moonraker: I have taken a look at the image and someone removed the photographer's name, which was recorded on the day of upload. I have added the name back in and clarified it is a work after the creator of the statue. The copyright of the statue is covered by a PD licence tag while the photograph is covered by a Creative Commons tag. The image also has an OTRS ticket, meaning that an experienced reviewer has seen additional evidence of the licence release and confirmed its validity. The file should be fine for reuse with DYK. From Hill To Shore (talk) 13:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
for image. Thank you, From Hill To Shore. I thought the problem with the alleged copyright of things photographed in public places, especially statues, was only in Europe, and not the US. Anyway, it sounds as if my concern about the photographer is now dealt with. Moonraker (talk) 14:44, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I came by to promote this, but the hook is really bland. ALT0 sounds like any business, and ALT1 mentions names readers might not be familiar with. More descriptive hook wording, or a different hook, would be appreciated. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 11:11, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Yoninah: think Alt 1 is good, Steinway pianos, it is a known name. Thoughts? --evrik (talk) 00:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would never have connected the Steinway Mansion with Steinway pianos. Yoninah (talk) 00:44, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Evrik: I edited the article and added more information from the source. Here is another alt:
  • ALT2: ... that unlike other foundries, the Modern Art Foundry uses the lost-wax casting method to produce large-scale bronze replicas of limited-edition sculptures?
  • There is one paragraph that lacks any cites, per Rule D2. If that could be verified, another alt idea would be:
  • ALT3: ... that in 2019, artisans at the Modern Art Foundry replaced an original zinc sculpture in the 1867 Civil War Soldiers Monument in Brooklyn with a bronze replica? Yoninah (talk) 12:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT3a: ... that in 2002, artisans at the Modern Art Foundry replaced the original zinc sculptures at the base of the Civil War Soldiers Monument in Brooklyn with bronze replicas? Richman, Jeff (2015-10-08). "Another Mystery Solved". The Green-Wood Historic Fund.--evrik (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) There's also currently a citation needed tag on the article right now. If another hook fact could be used, my suggestion could involve the fact that they've done work for museums around the world as well. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the help. I fixed the references. I have no preference on the hook. @Moonraker:, can you pick a new hook so this can be promoted? Thank you! --evrik (talk) 15:14, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I copyedited ALT3 based on the source, though I don't think it's the most interesting of the alts. Yoninah (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I struck Alt3, because the figures were off. --evrik (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yoninah I see your point about one hook being bland. If you say it isn’t “hooky”, it’s a call for you to make. I don’t agree with what you say on ALT1. I guess *most* DYK hooks include “names readers might not be familiar with”. We have no DYK rule that hooks can only mention familiar people, places, businesses, and so on... thank goodness! Moonraker (talk) 15:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Moonraker: Right. But if the ALT1 hook wording is going to stay this way, it's really not hooky. The reader has no idea what the Modern Art Foundry is, or the Steinway Mansion. Why would they click on it? Yoninah (talk) 15:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yoninah, in my humble opinion, with most DYK hooks people have no idea what something is, so they click on a link to find out more. Both of the blue links in ALT1 strike me as worth following for that reason. Isn’t it what DYK is all about? Moonraker (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Moonraker: you can go ahead and approve it again, but I won't promote it. I doubt it will get more than a few hundred clicks. Yoninah (talk) 16:17, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Moonraker: Thank you. --evrik (talk) 02:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (again) for ALT1. I don’t see any reasonable objections to it. for ALT2, the same problem as before with “limited edition”. for ALT3a, which also checks out. evrik, let’s hope Yoninah takes a liking to that. I am signing off here. Moonraker (talk) 03:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Modern_Art_Foundry&oldid=1207454972"