This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Guillermo Vargas article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Guillermo Vargas received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Costa Rica may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The petition itself is only signficant if it's cited to a reliable source; links to petitions don't achieve anything more than promoting the petition- they don't actually add reliable information. Please, do not link to the petition. See the external links guidelines. - FisherQueen ( talk · contribs) 11:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I know WP does allow links to the petitions web sites as an antispam control. Also it does not condone citations to blogs or personal web sites, which is where most of this info comes from. However, there are over 1 millions signatures which you can verify and none of the usual hoax reporting sites that I have checked have this as a hoax. That, as well as the many and widespread reports on Google and youtube tell me "it may not be provable as fact, but it is notable as a phenomenon even if it is a hoax and should be included in some manor". -- Triwbe ( talk) 17:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
--- I tried to add two links to petition online with 1.4 and 2.5 mill signatures each. The fact that the petitions now have 4 million signatures is significant and it should be referrable.
Gnurkel ( talk) 10:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Everyone can interpret these signatures, if they mean that 4 million people are concerned about dogs or that 4 million people are stupid - there is no better reference to these 4 million signatures than the lists themselves. The 4 million signatures and the roughly 1 million members of anti-Vargas groups on Facebook are significant in light of modern media, how large masses are turned to rage from seing what they believe is a dog being starved and killed without checking the backdrop, ignoring the message of millions of animals staring and being mistreated.
One should be able to refer to the signatures and the facebook groups themselves, not just a static article talking about the signatures and sites. Why not be able to refer to the source itself?
Gnurkel ( talk) 11:04, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2341_no_excuses_for_cruelty.cfm?searchterm=guillermo_vargas - this should be proof enough thyat it is not a "hoax" as some like to claim. Also, Guillermo Vargas' groups website has all of the information up:
http://www.marcaacme.com/calendario.php
And here is their link to their information regarding the exhibition:
http://elperritovive.blogspot.com/ It is called "the doggy went this way".
Another page from their website regarding the dog exhibit:
http://www.marcaacme.com/blogs/analog/index.php/2007/08/22/5_piezas_de_habacuc
August 6th 2008 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.210.52.134 (
talk)
22:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Does any body have any solid sources about facts for this guy at all? It sounds like the petition is real, but I think an important question is: is the abuse he's accused of real? Any good sources for info on the abuse, or only allegations? If so, this may be a case of urban legend snowballing into something real. Until it's sourced, shouldn't we remove "animal abuser" from the opening line of the lede? Without a source, it comes off as inflammatory and POV. Micahmedia ( talk) 22:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I didn't see a citation to a a criminal record, and there is no mention of him being an artist, just a guy who ties dogs up. Rangikusboy ( talk) 22:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
So I notice you are a moron. Good work. Perhaps you should actually check what art is and come back with a definition of why it is NOT art before you spout the same idiocy again. That art is subjective does not dismiss it in any way, shape or form. In fact quite the opposite, its like a Hyrda, if you say "its subjective, so therefore I can say it isnt art", that it IS art pops up immediately. So no, it remains art. Your qualm is whether or not you like it or approve. Im afraid your stupidity has no say in what is and isnt art, especially, and ironicly, that your definition of art would more than likely include this as art by the sheer facts surrounding the case, and not the faux outrage over a dog that didn't starve, wasn't harmed and faced nothing of which people like you insist occured in order to say "its not art". 119.11.24.208 ( talk) 11:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Harlequin
http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2341_no_excuses_for_cruelty.cfm?searchterm=guillermo_vargas - this should be proof enough thyat it is not a "hoax" as some like to claim. Also, Guillermo Vargas' groups website has all of the information up: http://www.marcaacme.com/calendario.php And here is their link to their information regarding the exhibition: http://elperritovive.blogspot.com/ It is called "the doggy went this way". Another page from their website regarding the dog exhibit: http://www.marcaacme.com/blogs/analog/index.php/2007/08/22/5_piezas_de_habacuc August 6th, 2008 3:28PM
Any reason he's in this category? Louis Waweru Talk 05:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
References: http://www.hsus.org/contact_us/humane_society_international.html#Q_dog_artist http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/675045 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.252.179.8 ( talk) 17:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
It is not a hoax, here's an article on the Guardian about the event. [1] Zisimos ( talk) 19:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone find a source on this? I got this from a prominant group on facebook... its at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=26898570848&ref=nf
You need a facebook account to see the page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.42.75 ( talk) 23:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, you should all know that the dog did die. It died while still in the show. Guillermo Vargas, himself has admitted to it. He phrased it as "the dog was going to die anyways." You should really put that into the page, maybe earn back some respect for wikipedia. Just a suggestion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleakimr ( talk • contribs) Apr 19, 2008
Ah no, perhaps you should read it before replying next time. He says the dog most likely died, but that it would have died regardless. At no point does he say it died at the gallery or in his possession. In fact, that pointless assumption is squashed by the countless times he and his gallery have said it escaped and they do not know what happened to it. That they knew it was near death by starvation when they caught it (even though they took care of it and fed it), shuts that down pretty easily. 119.11.24.208 ( talk) 11:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Harlequin
I think we need to start from the ground and work our way up - can anyone provide information regarding the "Bienal Centroamericana Honduras 2008" in reference? Specifically, is there a reliable source around that is not specifically tied to the petition - something that could reliably represent a neutral point of view? Finally, I have found an interesting link of interest - I have no idea whether or not it is legit - you decide. http://guillermohabacucvargas.blogspot.com/ X-Kal ( talk) 07:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
This article is so bias it is borderline comical. It was obviously just set up to put the dog abuse section in. His life and other works are put in merely as a place holder. ( Dbcraft ( talk) 17:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC))
See WP:REFB for how to format refs properly. Ty 06:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
“chained up inches out of reach of a bowl of food in 2007, and with the intention of repeating the performance in Honduras in November, 2008” is all WP:OR (except the date and place). Can you source it? It appears no where else in the article.
How do my edits to Exposición N° 1 amount to a WP:NPOV violation? I included more details about the exhibit (including the correct name). No violation of NPOV there. I even searched for, found, and included the original source for the claim that the dog died. Please explain your revert. Furthermore, changing "states" to "claims" is blatant POV-pushing.
On what grounds did you remove the awards? They are sourced and relevant; need I remind you that this is an artist’s bio? Please justify your actions. -- Irn ( talk) 01:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
“ | We should write sympatyhetically ( sic) about all living people as we are an encyclopedia not an attack site. | ” |
— SqueakBox, Talk:Justin Berry/Archive 5#BLP issues - [2] |
I know lots of people hate it when you move their posts into new categories, but I feel that the older posts on this talk page are no longer relevant to the current article. Should this talk page be archived to preserve past input while streamlining conversation about further improving the article from where it is today? If no one responds to this post in the next few days / weeks, I plan on archiving some or all of this talk page. (If you agree, feel free to set up the archive yourself.) Garvin Talk 01:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Here is what is written in the introduction of the article. Has anyone bothered to read it? Below, I have provided a translation. Just wanted to point out that this is definitely NOT a neutral point of view...
<<Juro por todos los dioces que has de ir al infierno maldito, asi me cueste el alma has de sufrir en el infierno por lo que le hiciste a ese perro. Yo soy artista, y creeme, tu eres solo mierda. "Aquellos que no aprecian la vida no merecen vivir" Tu no aprecias la vida. y si te quejas que nadie hace nada, tu ponte a hacer algo. Y de Hipocritas, tu eres el mas ipocrita que conosco!>>
Translation:
<< I swear on all the gods that you have to go to hell, that's how bad my soul hurts you have to suffer in hell for what you did to that dog. I am an artist and believe me, you are only shit. "Those who don't appreciate life don't deserve to live." You don't appreciate life. And if you complain that no one does anything, you do something yourself. And about hypocrites, you are the biggest hypocrite I know>>
devon1982
Devon1982 (
talk)
09:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have the ACTUAL facts on this guy from REPUTABLE sources? Of course our professors don't let us use Wikipedia for information on anything because it is so unreliable. I am having so much trouble finding anything real on this! Help me! Has anyone contacted Vargas himself? 97.81.16.94 ( talk) 21:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)rguest83@gmail.com
While this may be wildly belated, there is no substitute for enterprise- contact him yourself. 203.158.44.83 ( talk) 14:28, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Guillermo Vargas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2341_no_excuses_for_cruelty.cfm?searchterm=guillermo_vargasWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:31, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Guillermo Vargas article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Guillermo Vargas received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Costa Rica may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The petition itself is only signficant if it's cited to a reliable source; links to petitions don't achieve anything more than promoting the petition- they don't actually add reliable information. Please, do not link to the petition. See the external links guidelines. - FisherQueen ( talk · contribs) 11:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I know WP does allow links to the petitions web sites as an antispam control. Also it does not condone citations to blogs or personal web sites, which is where most of this info comes from. However, there are over 1 millions signatures which you can verify and none of the usual hoax reporting sites that I have checked have this as a hoax. That, as well as the many and widespread reports on Google and youtube tell me "it may not be provable as fact, but it is notable as a phenomenon even if it is a hoax and should be included in some manor". -- Triwbe ( talk) 17:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
--- I tried to add two links to petition online with 1.4 and 2.5 mill signatures each. The fact that the petitions now have 4 million signatures is significant and it should be referrable.
Gnurkel ( talk) 10:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Everyone can interpret these signatures, if they mean that 4 million people are concerned about dogs or that 4 million people are stupid - there is no better reference to these 4 million signatures than the lists themselves. The 4 million signatures and the roughly 1 million members of anti-Vargas groups on Facebook are significant in light of modern media, how large masses are turned to rage from seing what they believe is a dog being starved and killed without checking the backdrop, ignoring the message of millions of animals staring and being mistreated.
One should be able to refer to the signatures and the facebook groups themselves, not just a static article talking about the signatures and sites. Why not be able to refer to the source itself?
Gnurkel ( talk) 11:04, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2341_no_excuses_for_cruelty.cfm?searchterm=guillermo_vargas - this should be proof enough thyat it is not a "hoax" as some like to claim. Also, Guillermo Vargas' groups website has all of the information up:
http://www.marcaacme.com/calendario.php
And here is their link to their information regarding the exhibition:
http://elperritovive.blogspot.com/ It is called "the doggy went this way".
Another page from their website regarding the dog exhibit:
http://www.marcaacme.com/blogs/analog/index.php/2007/08/22/5_piezas_de_habacuc
August 6th 2008 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.210.52.134 (
talk)
22:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Does any body have any solid sources about facts for this guy at all? It sounds like the petition is real, but I think an important question is: is the abuse he's accused of real? Any good sources for info on the abuse, or only allegations? If so, this may be a case of urban legend snowballing into something real. Until it's sourced, shouldn't we remove "animal abuser" from the opening line of the lede? Without a source, it comes off as inflammatory and POV. Micahmedia ( talk) 22:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I didn't see a citation to a a criminal record, and there is no mention of him being an artist, just a guy who ties dogs up. Rangikusboy ( talk) 22:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
So I notice you are a moron. Good work. Perhaps you should actually check what art is and come back with a definition of why it is NOT art before you spout the same idiocy again. That art is subjective does not dismiss it in any way, shape or form. In fact quite the opposite, its like a Hyrda, if you say "its subjective, so therefore I can say it isnt art", that it IS art pops up immediately. So no, it remains art. Your qualm is whether or not you like it or approve. Im afraid your stupidity has no say in what is and isnt art, especially, and ironicly, that your definition of art would more than likely include this as art by the sheer facts surrounding the case, and not the faux outrage over a dog that didn't starve, wasn't harmed and faced nothing of which people like you insist occured in order to say "its not art". 119.11.24.208 ( talk) 11:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Harlequin
http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2341_no_excuses_for_cruelty.cfm?searchterm=guillermo_vargas - this should be proof enough thyat it is not a "hoax" as some like to claim. Also, Guillermo Vargas' groups website has all of the information up: http://www.marcaacme.com/calendario.php And here is their link to their information regarding the exhibition: http://elperritovive.blogspot.com/ It is called "the doggy went this way". Another page from their website regarding the dog exhibit: http://www.marcaacme.com/blogs/analog/index.php/2007/08/22/5_piezas_de_habacuc August 6th, 2008 3:28PM
Any reason he's in this category? Louis Waweru Talk 05:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
References: http://www.hsus.org/contact_us/humane_society_international.html#Q_dog_artist http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/675045 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.252.179.8 ( talk) 17:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
It is not a hoax, here's an article on the Guardian about the event. [1] Zisimos ( talk) 19:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone find a source on this? I got this from a prominant group on facebook... its at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=26898570848&ref=nf
You need a facebook account to see the page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.42.75 ( talk) 23:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, you should all know that the dog did die. It died while still in the show. Guillermo Vargas, himself has admitted to it. He phrased it as "the dog was going to die anyways." You should really put that into the page, maybe earn back some respect for wikipedia. Just a suggestion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleakimr ( talk • contribs) Apr 19, 2008
Ah no, perhaps you should read it before replying next time. He says the dog most likely died, but that it would have died regardless. At no point does he say it died at the gallery or in his possession. In fact, that pointless assumption is squashed by the countless times he and his gallery have said it escaped and they do not know what happened to it. That they knew it was near death by starvation when they caught it (even though they took care of it and fed it), shuts that down pretty easily. 119.11.24.208 ( talk) 11:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Harlequin
I think we need to start from the ground and work our way up - can anyone provide information regarding the "Bienal Centroamericana Honduras 2008" in reference? Specifically, is there a reliable source around that is not specifically tied to the petition - something that could reliably represent a neutral point of view? Finally, I have found an interesting link of interest - I have no idea whether or not it is legit - you decide. http://guillermohabacucvargas.blogspot.com/ X-Kal ( talk) 07:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
This article is so bias it is borderline comical. It was obviously just set up to put the dog abuse section in. His life and other works are put in merely as a place holder. ( Dbcraft ( talk) 17:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC))
See WP:REFB for how to format refs properly. Ty 06:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
“chained up inches out of reach of a bowl of food in 2007, and with the intention of repeating the performance in Honduras in November, 2008” is all WP:OR (except the date and place). Can you source it? It appears no where else in the article.
How do my edits to Exposición N° 1 amount to a WP:NPOV violation? I included more details about the exhibit (including the correct name). No violation of NPOV there. I even searched for, found, and included the original source for the claim that the dog died. Please explain your revert. Furthermore, changing "states" to "claims" is blatant POV-pushing.
On what grounds did you remove the awards? They are sourced and relevant; need I remind you that this is an artist’s bio? Please justify your actions. -- Irn ( talk) 01:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
“ | We should write sympatyhetically ( sic) about all living people as we are an encyclopedia not an attack site. | ” |
— SqueakBox, Talk:Justin Berry/Archive 5#BLP issues - [2] |
I know lots of people hate it when you move their posts into new categories, but I feel that the older posts on this talk page are no longer relevant to the current article. Should this talk page be archived to preserve past input while streamlining conversation about further improving the article from where it is today? If no one responds to this post in the next few days / weeks, I plan on archiving some or all of this talk page. (If you agree, feel free to set up the archive yourself.) Garvin Talk 01:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Here is what is written in the introduction of the article. Has anyone bothered to read it? Below, I have provided a translation. Just wanted to point out that this is definitely NOT a neutral point of view...
<<Juro por todos los dioces que has de ir al infierno maldito, asi me cueste el alma has de sufrir en el infierno por lo que le hiciste a ese perro. Yo soy artista, y creeme, tu eres solo mierda. "Aquellos que no aprecian la vida no merecen vivir" Tu no aprecias la vida. y si te quejas que nadie hace nada, tu ponte a hacer algo. Y de Hipocritas, tu eres el mas ipocrita que conosco!>>
Translation:
<< I swear on all the gods that you have to go to hell, that's how bad my soul hurts you have to suffer in hell for what you did to that dog. I am an artist and believe me, you are only shit. "Those who don't appreciate life don't deserve to live." You don't appreciate life. And if you complain that no one does anything, you do something yourself. And about hypocrites, you are the biggest hypocrite I know>>
devon1982
Devon1982 (
talk)
09:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have the ACTUAL facts on this guy from REPUTABLE sources? Of course our professors don't let us use Wikipedia for information on anything because it is so unreliable. I am having so much trouble finding anything real on this! Help me! Has anyone contacted Vargas himself? 97.81.16.94 ( talk) 21:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)rguest83@gmail.com
While this may be wildly belated, there is no substitute for enterprise- contact him yourself. 203.158.44.83 ( talk) 14:28, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Guillermo Vargas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2341_no_excuses_for_cruelty.cfm?searchterm=guillermo_vargasWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:31, 25 October 2017 (UTC)