Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Chain Reaction (sculpture)"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>BlueMoonset
(withdrawn by request of article's creator)
imported>Viriditas
(Nominating Chain Reaction for DYK)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{#if:no|<noinclude>[[Category:Failed DYK nominations&nbsp;from December 2013]]<div style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+
{{DYKsubpage
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify this page.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|this nomination's talk page]], [[Talk:{{SUBPAGENAME}}|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'''.''
+
|monthyear=March 2015
 
+
|passed=<!--When closing discussion, enter yes or no-->
The result was: '''rejected''' by [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 15:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)<br />}}
+
|2=
Withdrawn per request of article creator, and issues of stability. Creator may renominate if article is listed as GA in future.
+
{{DYK conditions}}
{{DYKC}}
 
 
====Chain Reaction (sculpture)====
 
====Chain Reaction (sculpture)====
 
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=Chain Reaction (sculpture)|Chain Reaction (sculpture)}}
 
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=Chain Reaction (sculpture)|Chain Reaction (sculpture)}}
<div style="float:right;margin-left:0.5em;">
+
<!-
</div>
+
 
* ... that '''''[[Chain Reaction (sculpture)|Chain Reaction]]''''' ''(pictured)'', based on a cartoon sketch by [[Paul Conrad]], was the first work of public art to become a landmark in [[Santa Monica, California|Santa Monica]]?
+
                  Please do not edit above this line unless you are a DYK volunteer who is closing the discussion.
 +
 
 +
-->
 +
* ... that '''''[[Chain Reaction (sculpture)|Chain Reaction]]''''', an  [[Anti-nuclear movement|anti-nuclear war]] sculpture, was anonymously funded by [[Joan Kroc]]?
 +
<!--
 +
-->
 
:*
 
:*
<small>Created by [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]).&nbsp;Nominated by [[User:Tentinator|Tentinator]] ([[User talk:Tentinator|talk]]) at 10:44, 20 December 2013 (UTC)</small>.
+
<small>Improved to Good Article status by [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]). Self nominated at 05:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC)</small>.
 
+
<!--
:* <u>'''The following has been checked in this review by Maile'''</u>
+
* {{DYKmake|Chain Reaction (sculpture)|Viriditas}}
::*No QPQ necessary, not a self nom
+
-->
:<u>Eligibility</u>
 
:*Article created  by Viriditas on December 17, 2013 and has 6,574 characters of readable prose
 
:*Article is NPOV, stable, no edit wars, no dispute tags
 
:<u>Sourcing</u>
 
:*Every paragraph sourced inline
 
:*No bare URLs, and no external links used as inline sources
 
:<u>Hook</u>
 
:*[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Original hook is NPOV, 131 characters, stated in the article and sourced offline. However, see dialogue below requesting a more relevant alt hook
 
:<u>Image</u>
 
:*Offering alt image, in addition to one offered by the nominator
 
:* [[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] All images in the article and freely licensed on Commons. See question below by Mandarax regarding U.S. Copyright law governing "Artwork and Sculptures" freedom of panorama
 
:<u>Tools</u>
 
:*Earwig (Copyvio check) found no violations
 
:*Duplication Detector spot check of individual citations shows no issues
 
:*Disambig links tool shows no issues
 
:*External links tool <s>shows [https://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Chain_Reaction_%28sculpture%29 two dead links]</s> See explanatiion below.
 
  
[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]]  <s>The photo would be good as a lead hook.</s> I think the current hook just misses the point of the sculpture. Could we perhaps have a hook that conveys the spirit of the sculpture in relation to Conrad's work that inspired it? It's obvious from reading the article that the "chain reaction" is a nuclear bomb explosion, and that Conrad's work was often his statement on war (or peace). Both the article and the hook could benefit from mentioning the sculpture's composition of "a 5 1/2-ton creation made of hundreds of feet of gigantic green-tinged chains set in concrete".[http://articles.latimes.com/1991-12-29/news/we-1810_1_chain-reaction LATimes]  [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 00:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
+
:* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING  :-->
:*'''Comment''':  There are no dead links.  The two external links (actually the same URL) are fine.  It appears that the checklinks tool used above generates false positives for links to Hulu so you may want to click on the links for yourself.  You may also want to add [[:File:Paul Conrad, Chain Reaction.JPG|this image]] as an ALT image up above.  Since I'm the creator but not the nominator, I'm not sure if I can comment on the hook or not. If you are willing to put this nom on hold for a day or two, I may be able to add more content for you to create a new hook based on your recommendation. I don't have that much free time at the moment, however, but I'll see what I can do. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 09:23, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::*Viriditas, I have struck through the issue on the dead links. <s>Alt image has been added per your request.</s> (Images have to actually be in the article).  This nomination can be put on hold as long as you need it to be.  Anybody can comment on the hook or suggest a new one, and as the creator you could suggest an alt hook that you feel best depicts the article.  I encourage you to add an alt hook of your own. Just make sure the hook fact is stated in the article, and sourced at the end of the sentence in the article. If I create an alt hook, someone else has to finish this review. Please post back here on the template after you've added more article content and, perhaps, even suggested a new hook. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 14:14, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::*[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Can an image copyright expert look at the images? Although they are currently Commons images, I believe the licenses are invalid. (See [[Commons:Freedom of panorama#United States]].) If this is the case, an image cannot be used for DYK, and the images would have to be removed from Commons, and any images to be used in the article would require fair use rationales. [[User:Mandarax|<span style="color:green">M<small>AN</small>d<small>ARAX</small></span>]]&nbsp;<span style="color:blue">•</span>&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandarax|<span style="color:#999900"><small>XAЯA</small>b<small>ИA</small>M</span>]] 01:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::*I have since removed all of the images from the article and I've [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Paul_Conrad,_Chain_Reaction.JPG nominated them for deletion] on Commons. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 04:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::*I would agree that [[Commons:Freedom of panorama#United States]] explicitly disallows images of sculptures for this time period. '''[[User:Harrias|<font color="#00cc33">Harrias</font>]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Harrias|<font color="#009900">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::*Viriditas, it looks like we can't use any of the images, and I have removed them from this nomination template. Per Mandarax, you probably need to remove the images from both the article and from Commons.  However, when you have time, let's deal with a better hook. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 19:02, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::::*I seriously question this interpretation of copyright law, and I tend to disregard the armchair lawyering going on here.  The sculpture was donated as a gift to the city.  In many cases, whenever this kind of exchange occurs, the artist relinquishes the right to copyright and trademark. The idea that a peace sculpture gifted to the city is protected by copyright goes against its very purpose.  It was intended to be viewed by as many people as possible all over the world, not to have its image limited by the rights of the artist.  The application and interpretation of the law is not only wrong in this example, but out of context, as it undermines the artistic intent of the sculpture.  [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 20:44, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::::*I may have been premature is deleting the images from this template and have restored them.  I have also posted a request at [[Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Third_opinion_requested_on_image_Copyright_Law|WT:DYK ]] for another opinion on this. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 23:08, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::::::*No, you did the right thing.  I have removed them again. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 23:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::::*Not entirely "donated as a gift" per the article "He donated the sculpture to the city of Santa Monica with the help of a then-anonymous donation of $250,000".  You are saying all rights were transferred by the artist to the city and enough released by them to allow us use. This might be true but evidence is needed. It is not usual for the artist to release copyright, though it does happen. As it is the three images used all have the photographer as "author" in the usual Commons mistaken fashion. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 23:28, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::::::*I agree that evidence is needed and that the burden is on me.  However, I am very busy and I do not have any free time to discuss this.  I did not file this DYK, so I should not be expected to even address it.  The Santa Monica city website has PDF files of related documents, and I also have a comprehensive report paid for by the city that gives an incredible amount of detail on the structure.  As for it being donated as a "gift" to the city, that wording is correct per the sources. You seem to be questioning that fact based on the article, not the sources. It was a gift donated to the city.  If the copyright was not relinquished, then it would be held by his wife Kay or his son Dave. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 23:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::::::*You are not the nominator, that is true. And the nominator is new to Wikipedia since 2013, and is lately nominating an extraordinarily large number of DYK hooks.  I rolled the dice on this one and decided you would be a better source of knowledge on the questions.  It was out of respect for you in particular, and in general that I thought you might want your work presented correctly at DYK.  Even if this is an inconvenience to you, I still think you are a more seasoned editor and have more knowledge of the subject matter.  But if you would rather wash your hands of this nomination, then say so.  We can let the nominator take it from here.  What do you say? [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 00:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::::::::*I would just go forward with removing the images at this time per below.  I can help with a new hook as time permits. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 01:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
  
:Fixed art in the US does not have freedom of panorama, meaning that any photo will be considered a derivative work of the copyrighted work of art. Just being donated to the city does make it free of copyright; the artist can retain that while making the gift. Even the transfer of the copyright to the city doesn't make it free of copyrights. We need proof that the art was licensed freely (unlikely), otherwise, all the images are non-free, those on commons have to be removed, and <s>all but</s>only one image can be used in the article per NFC. --[[User:Masem|M<font size="-3">ASEM</font>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 00:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
+
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
:*Posting because Blue posted on my talk page. As per Masem, all of these images are non-free in the US owing to a lack of freedom of panorama. For older sculptures (1970s and earlier) the inclusion or lack of a copyright notice may have been a consideration, but since this was made in 1990 there is no doubt that the statue is still in copyright.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 01:07, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::*For the sake of clarity, how do you know the sculpture is copyrighted?  In the above, Masem made an argument based on probability, but this sculpture is improbable (or rather, unique) in virtually every respect.  For example, it is only one of two landmark-designated outdoor sculptures in the entire country. If you were to make a similar argument about its probability of being designated a landmark, you would be wrong.  One of the problems with Wikipedians is that they have a tendency to apply the policies as a broad-brush in situations where a narrow, tapered brush is needed. Based on Kroc's campaign for nuclear disarmament and her funding of this project, I would be extremely surprised to find that this sculpture was copyrighted.  Granted, that is the default assumption, but it seems out of place here. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 01:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::* As it has a 1990s installation date - past the point where copyright is otherwise assumed and no registration is required - there will be copyright on the sculpture. What would be nice is if the artist or the current copyright holder put it out there in a free license, but we need proof positive of that (there would still be the copyright but a free license to reuse it, just as we do with en.wiki content). --[[User:Masem|M<font size="-3">ASEM</font>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 01:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::*Just to clarify, are you saying that from a legal point of view, copyright is inherent and implicit in the accessioning and installation of a sculpture, and that any claim otherwise must be spelled out by the assumed copyright holder?  It is my understanding that the artist, Paul Conrad, relinquished the copyright when he gifted the sculpture to the city of Santa Monica.  The question then becomes—if we assume for the sake of argument that he did relinquish the copyright—is that copyright transferable to the city of Santa Monica, or is it now free to photograph? Although there is quite a bit of discussion about the original contract Conrad signed with the city, the contract itself does not appear to be online.  However, the procedures for donating gifts of art to the city are online.  [http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Portals/Culture/Public_Art_Program/Collect.Mgmt%20Proc.9-04.pdf]  It does say that gifted artwork requires "an executed contract transferring title of the artwork and clearly defining  the rights and responsibilities of all parties" and that "in general, works of art will be acquired without legal restrictions as to future use and disposition, except with respect to the State or Federal laws on preservation, copyright, and/or resale of works of art."  Does this mean all gifted works remain copyrighted? [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 02:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::*Indeed it does. The copyright does not just evaporate, and someone owns it, though (if say it is the city) they might choose to license it out such that we can use it, or give up all rights. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 02:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
::::::*Exactly, and I note that US copyright law now recognises copyright for almost everything (particularly if it's in the least bit creative) automatically. These comments could be considered copyrighted.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 06:15, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::::*Viriditas left me a message on my talk page on Jan  4 that he is working on this and would like the nomination closed out on or after Jan 7. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 22:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 
::::::::*Viriditas is doing active edits of the article as of today's date.  Also, I would prefer that this editor be the one to suggest the '''ALT ''' hook requested above, as he would know what would best represent the article's content. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 14:21, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 
:::::::::*{{ping|Viriditas}}, can you let us know on the status of a new hook and whether or not you're finished editing the article?" [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 12:16, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 
::::::::::*I don't have a hook, and the article is not finished.  I don't think this should be submitted for DYK because there is an ongoing dispute with the city and the future of the sculpture is currently being debated.  This is the reason I did not originally submit a DYK for this article, as it was submitted by another editor.  Because this is a political hot potato for the city and the activist community in Santa Monica, submitting a DYK at this time would make it look like Wikipedia was promoting it.  Therefore, to avoid any semblance of activist editing (as the city council debates the future of the sculpture), I would ask that this DYK nominated by [[User:Tentinator]] be rejected as I will not be pursuing it.  My understanding is that under the new DYK rules, if I pursue a GA nomination in the future (after the city council makes their decision) I may have another opportunity to submit a DYK. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 12:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 
*[[File:Symbol delete vote.svg|16px]] As detailed by {{ping|Viriditas}}, due to local politics in Santa Monica, CA, the article is not yet stable enough to be nominated, and that placing this article on the main page would look like a political POV by DYK. The editor requests this nomination be Rejected.  As the original reviewer, I concur. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 13:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 
{{-}}{{#if:no|</div></noinclude>|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template talk:Did you know/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|[[Category:Pending DYK nominations]][[Category:DYK/Nominations|Pending]]|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template:Did you know nominations/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|[[Category:DYK/Nominations|Pending]][[Category:Pending DYK nominations]]}}}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 

Revision as of 05:59, 7 March 2015

Chain Reaction (sculpture)

Improved to Good Article status by Viriditas (talk). Self nominated at 05:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC).