Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Engagement Ring (Roy Lichtenstein)"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>TonyTheTiger
(reply)
imported>Vanished user adhmfdfmykrdyr
(Taking over review...)
Line 21: Line 21:
 
:[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Length and newness is fine. It is classed as a stub. I don't think you get 2 self noms for [[Template:Did you know nominations/Stafanie Taylor]] unless I'm not understanding the QPQ rule. I can't find the hook in the article! The nearest I can find is: "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." I accept I'm no art historian however.. [[User:Secretlondon|Secretlondon]] ([[User talk:Secretlondon|talk]]) 00:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 
:[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Length and newness is fine. It is classed as a stub. I don't think you get 2 self noms for [[Template:Did you know nominations/Stafanie Taylor]] unless I'm not understanding the QPQ rule. I can't find the hook in the article! The nearest I can find is: "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." I accept I'm no art historian however.. [[User:Secretlondon|Secretlondon]] ([[User talk:Secretlondon|talk]]) 00:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 
::Yes the sentence "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is what this hook is about. Do I need to change the hook?--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|C]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|BIO]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:FOUR]]) </small> 01:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 
::Yes the sentence "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is what this hook is about. Do I need to change the hook?--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|C]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|BIO]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:FOUR]]) </small> 01:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 +
 +
* [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Previous reviewer handled QPQ, newness and length. Both images have fair use rationales.  Article is completely supported by inline citations.
 +
* [[File:Pictogram voting keep.svg|16px]]  Book sources support text and were not plagiarised writing the article.
 +
* [[File:Pictogram voting keep.svg|16px]] I see the previous reviewers comments.  I think they are valid to a degree.  The text is not directly supporting this in a blinkingly obvious kind of way. "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is the sentence but is it requires reader interpretation to get to the fact. I'm inclined to let this slide. --[[User:LauraHale|LauraHale]] ([[User talk:LauraHale|talk]]) 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 +
 +
[[File:Pictogram voting keep.svg|16px]] Good to go if mover is confident in my thinking. :) --[[User:LauraHale|LauraHale]] ([[User talk:LauraHale|talk]]) 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 +
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 05:43, 12 June 2012

Engagement Ring (Roy Lichtenstein)

Created/expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nom at 20:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Length and newness is fine. It is classed as a stub. I don't think you get 2 self noms for Template:Did you know nominations/Stafanie Taylor unless I'm not understanding the QPQ rule. I can't find the hook in the article! The nearest I can find is: "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." I accept I'm no art historian however.. Secretlondon (talk) 00:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes the sentence "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is what this hook is about. Do I need to change the hook?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Previous reviewer handled QPQ, newness and length. Both images have fair use rationales. Article is completely supported by inline citations.
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Book sources support text and were not plagiarised writing the article.
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg I see the previous reviewers comments. I think they are valid to a degree. The text is not directly supporting this in a blinkingly obvious kind of way. "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is the sentence but is it requires reader interpretation to get to the fact. I'm inclined to let this slide. --LauraHale (talk) 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svg Good to go if mover is confident in my thinking. :) --LauraHale (talk) 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)