![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view. Their edits to this article were last checked for neutrality on 2 April 2021 by Vexations.
|
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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Words linked in the article should only be linked internally to wiki articles. Put two square brackets either end of the word.
Avoid bold text apart from where the title is mentioned in the first sentence.
Remove external links to words. See wikify above.
External links can be placed after a sentence as a reference to verify the source of information, but not merely to provide extra information. In the latter case, external links section is available.
This article at the moment does not assert sufficient notability or prominence of the artist in terms of stated achievement, prizes, reviews, media coverage, shows etc.
"Galleries and museums throughout the world" are claimed, yet there are not specific ones mentioned and there is no verification.
Should notability not be established and verified, the article may be proposed for deletion.
Tyrenius 10:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I have almost finished my father's page when you dare delete it! I am cleaning it as instructed so please let me finish this. I am almost done. He is a very important artist for those who know art.
erica nechvatal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.57.34.12 ( talk • contribs) [06:02, 29 August 2006]
You are doing a good job with formatting and so on, but notability needs to be established. Some shows in major galleries would be good, or quotes from magazines or books about his work + reference for them. Please remember to be CIVIL. Tyrenius 14:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Birth date and place. Education details.
Do we take it his PhD was gained in 1997? Where are his shows in museums and galleries round the world as initially stated?
There still doesn't seem much to make him notable. Perhaps some material from the External links could be incorporated, and the link turned into a reference, instead of merely a link.
Tyrenius 09:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
(reposting comment which deleted other material)
Somebody puts this tag on top of the page I added images to: "The creator of or main contributor to this page may have a conflict of interest with the subject of this article. This page may be deleted unless it uses neutral language and cites independent, reliable, third-party sources that verify all content and show that the subject is notable. Please discuss further on the talk page."
Well, all of that has been resolved long ago. All I did was add 2 images.
Rydernechvatal
The images illustrate the text and the text has been vetted and verified. If you have noted art historians like Frank Popper pointing to the importance of his work in his book From Technological to Virtual Art, then why would you question his presence in wikipedia?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rydernechvatal ( talk • contribs)
OK. I understand. But really all the content at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nechvatal is objective, factual and historically acurate. (~~~~)
I see that this is still at the top of pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nechvatal and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Popper
"The creator of or main contributor to this page may have a conflict of interest with the subject of this article. This page may be deleted unless it uses neutral language and cites independent, reliable, third-party sources that verify all content and show that the subject is notable. Please discuss further on the talk page. This article has been tagged since May 2007."
As I pointed out yesterday, there is only neutral language and the information does cite independent, reliable, third-party sources that verify all content and show that the subject is notable.
Can you please remove the tags or allow me to do so?
Thank you
Rydernechvatal 12:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
What exactly is the purpose of the artist's photo? Is it an actual art piece, a self-portrait? If so, is it identified as such? It does not seem to add anything to the article. I have removed it twice and I really don't feel it should be placed back in, at least not without a discussion here. Also, it is helpful if Rydernechvatal would include edit summaries. I posted a note on his/her talk page. This is a matter of respect for other editors so we know edits, changes, deletions and reverts are being made in good faith (and this isn't an accusation of bad faith editing on Rydernechvatal's part, but it is hard to know what his or her intentions are without edit summaries). Thanks. Freshacconci 13:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Photo is of the artist and given to me with his approval. Don't you want his photo?
I do not know what edit summaries are. Sorry.
Rydernechvatal 14:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
This article is not written according to wikipedia's standards. It is written from the point of view of the artist or a close associate ofd the arist. User:Rydernechvatal should refrain from editing the article and put suggested changes on this page, so that other non-partisan editors can decide whether the material should be included. Tyrenius 14:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
++++
OK Well its been around 3 days now with the ugly {{COI|date=June 2007}} sign at the top of the page. The citations are given above. Will someone get rid of the {{COI|date=June 2007}}
Thank you very much
User rydernechvatal is up to bad behavior on wikipedia. Have a search for "nechvatal" on wikipedia and guess what you'll find? That one "Joseph Nechvatal" is one of the most significant artists of the late 20th century. According to whom? According to rydernechvatal, who has authored and edited dozens and dozens of articles so as to make this dubious point.
The fact that Nechvatal has exhibited internationally puts him in the company of thousands upon thousands of artists. This is not to devalue the artists work in any way, but to suggest that the artists fame on wikipedia is entirely created by himself, his daughter, or his comrades. Said search for "nechvatal" brings up countless links, many of exceedingly questionable merit. I must suggest that rydernechvatal's contributions be reviewed in their entirety. Given the extent of this fraud, I believe that wikipedia may face on ongoing struggle to keep Nechvatal or his cohort from mischief.-- Dylanfly 17:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Well I had the idea that adding content to wiki was what was expected. I fail to understand the "pure genius" comment other an attempt to be nasty. I may add that his 2 essays on Baudrillard were accepted for publication at the International Journal of Baudrillard Studies: http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/ so your testimony to their worthlessness seems silly and rather petty of you. Yes I created this page and 2 more (Frank Popper and Ebon Fisher) but after this experience there will be no more content supplied by me. There are NO claims of "global influence" - only specific facts concerning all three pages I created for you. If you object to my linking his early work to punk - then remove that reference but please stop your pettiness.
Rydernechvatal [07:38, 25 June 2007]
I think you dodge the issues at hand completely. The issue here is the integrity of the online encyclopedia. To place Nechvatal into the field of collage artists, on par with Matisse, is patently disrespectful to this project. There are thousands of artists who do collage, and very few deserve mention on Wikipedia. My brother is an artist but you won't find me putting him all over Wikipedia! He just doesn't have the stature required. That's not a criticism of his work (or of Nechvatal's), it's a statement about what an encyclopedia is for. May I suggest you build Nechvatal a nice MySpace page?
Similarly, to place a 2 page review on Baudrillard alongside the remarks of Susan Sontag is not helpful either. The point of the encyclopedia is not to list every possible thing connected to Baudrillard (in which case Nechvatal's piece would qualify); the point is to discuss and link things which help introduce and illuminate someone at the scale of an encyclopedia. There are thousands of published articles on Baudrillard and very, very few of them have a place on Wikipedia. The same is true of punk visual art and so on and so forth.
You really don't own up to any of this. This is why the charge of pettiness applies well to you: if you truly took responsibility, you would remove your additions and links yourself, rather than ditching this chore to the community. But that's the basic misunderstanding here: Wikipedia is not about individual promotion, by self by fans or by family, it's about a community of people building knowledge in a collaborative way.--Dylanfly 14:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC) [posted by User:Rydernechvatal]
Nechvatal, as a collagist, is discussed in Brandon Taylor's recent book "Collage" published by Thames & Hudson Ltd, 2006, p. 221. Perhaps your brother is in that book as well? Thus I have nothing to own up to.
For the first citation: He has also exhibited in Paris, Cologne, Alalst, Belgium, Lund and Munich and has participated in museum exhibitions around the world.[citation needed] -- see the artists CV here for list of exhibitions : http://www.eyewithwings.net/nechvatal/bio/bio.htm
For your 2nd citation for his work being in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.[citation needed] see: http://www.msstate.edu/Fineart_Online/Backissues/Vol_15/faf_v15_n04/text/review03.html
For #3: Art historian Donald Kuspit has written in his essay The Matrix of Sensations that Nechvatal's digital painting demonstrates that "there are more possibilities of freedom in digital art — that is, the "mental elements" are "free[r] to enter into various combinations" and thus to be manipulated — than in architecture, painting and sculpture."[citation needed]
see: http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/kuspit/kuspit8-5-05.asp which is cited in the reference section
For #4: Frank Popper states in his book From Technological to Virtual Art that Nechvatal's computer virus work is important to the history of art as it has advanced the use of digital technology and artificial intelligence, while defending and preserving the values of formal painting.[citation needed] see: Frank Popper From Technological to Virtual Art, MIT Press, pp. 120-123
This is also cited in the reference section
Does that help?
Rydernechvatal [07:38, 25 June 2007]
Ok It has been weeks now since multiple editors reworked this page (which I started on Joseph Nechvatal). I have asked for the COI tag to be removed by those that placed it there - but there has been no response. So I am going to remove it now.
81.57.34.12 [ Rydernechvatal ] 17:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
May I, or will you, remove the COI sign now? This page has been reviewed by numerous editors over the last month.
Rydernechvatal 07:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
This page has been reviewed and revised by numerous editors over the last month and I have requested that the editors who put a COI tag on it now remove it - but I have had no response or action taken. So I am removing it now myself.
Rydernechvatal 07:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
OK. I heard from my x-assistant Valueyou about what has been going on here and she encouraged me to weight in so I am. But I don't intend to work on Wikipedia directly after learning what a hornets nest that can be. Anyway, if you still would like Valueyou to continue working on Wikipedia, please lay off her. JosephNechvatal ( talk) 01:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I see no proof that there is no conflict of interest, besides Valueyou's claim that there is none. Paradoxically, Valueyou, while claiming there is no COI, has instead repeatedly claimed to have a connection with Nechvatal, proving there is probably a conflict of interest. For example, Valueyou contacted Nechvatal to have the latter edit multiple Wikipedia pages.
Furthermore, one may cite a published work (which others could access), but one may not site someone's unpublished notes (which no one else has access to). One cannot claim to have no connection with or interest in someone, and also claim to have access to that person's private and personal materials. A simple
declaration of interest would be much more convincing than an unsupported denial, and would prove objectivity better than an unsupported claim of objectivity.
Hyacinth (
talk)
19:42, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the claim that there are two outside testimonials, two anonymous people who are personally involved with Nechvatal and Valueyou only compounds the conflict of interest, assuming that these two people are not Nechvatal or Valueyou. Nechvatal, perhaps you would find Wikipedia being a "hornet's nest" less painful if you didn't beat the nest with a stick. Hyacinth ( talk) 19:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
This is a notice that I have marked three images on this page as needing permission. The images are:
While they all say that the artwork has been released into the public domain by the artist that is not enough to prove that they are licensed under something that can be used. If the artist does wish to license them under this license they must fill out a
WP:CONSENT form and email it into permissions-enwikimedia.org. The images have been marked for deletion and will be deleted in 7 days if the email has not been sent in by that time. If the proof has been sent, notice must be placed on the image pages by putting {{subst:OP}} on the page. Since the uploader has not edited Wikipedia in quite a long time I wanted to post this here as well to make anyone watching this page aware of the situation. If anyone has any questions please feel free to let me know on my talk page or you can {{
ping}} me here. Thanks. --
Majora (
talk)
02:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
There are three accounts involved in direct editing the article that contains the name Nechvatal: JosephNechvatal, Rydernechvatal and EricaNechvatal. Rydernechvatal ( talk · contribs) made considerble contribution to this article, as did someone who says they're Joseph Nechvatal's "x-assistant". Graywalls ( talk) 18:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
@ Hyacinth and Smilo Don: (Smilon Don was Dylanfly) requesting if they have any comment as previous participants. I stand by my placement of "autobio", as having been written by the subject, or those closely associated with the subject. Whether to use COI or Autobio tag is debatable.
Here's added text stats:
Valueyou · 17,971 (37.7%) (Editor states they were a Nechvatal's employee from 2008-2011)
Taxisfolder · 2,227 (4.7%) (former account of Valueyou, according to prior editors)
Erica:
EricaNechvatal · 1,276 (2.7%) (created the page)
81.57.34.12 · 7,692 (16.2%) (Erica Nechvatal, per the name they signed in one of talk page comments claiming ownership to the page)
A Nechvatal:
Rydernechvatal · 5,787 (12.2%) (obvious Nechvatal)
Total 73.5%
Freshacconci · 4,960 (10.4%) (not sure?) (comment: while I don't think or never suspected they have COI. I was only listing out the top additions, but since one editor took this as "alleging a coi", I have struck this out, specifically to avoid any further confusion.
Graywalls (
talk)
19:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Those with reasonably certain connections to Nechvatal are responsible for 3/4 of addition to the article. Graywalls ( talk) 18:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Why am I mentioned in this discussion? Hyacinth ( talk) 22:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Is there any example of bias in the article content? Hyacinth ( talk) 23:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
There seems to be a small edit war dispute going on in relation to this statement: "Nechvatal cites influences such as
John von Neumann,
John Horton Conway,
John Koza,
Gustav Metzger and
Marcel Duchamp.
[1]
@
Graywalls and
Vexations: I don't see anything particularly undue about this, nor is it problematic that it's a primary source (interview). I'd suggest leaving it in. ---
Possibly (
talk)
19:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
References
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view. Their edits to this article were last checked for neutrality on 2 April 2021 by Vexations.
|
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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Words linked in the article should only be linked internally to wiki articles. Put two square brackets either end of the word.
Avoid bold text apart from where the title is mentioned in the first sentence.
Remove external links to words. See wikify above.
External links can be placed after a sentence as a reference to verify the source of information, but not merely to provide extra information. In the latter case, external links section is available.
This article at the moment does not assert sufficient notability or prominence of the artist in terms of stated achievement, prizes, reviews, media coverage, shows etc.
"Galleries and museums throughout the world" are claimed, yet there are not specific ones mentioned and there is no verification.
Should notability not be established and verified, the article may be proposed for deletion.
Tyrenius 10:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I have almost finished my father's page when you dare delete it! I am cleaning it as instructed so please let me finish this. I am almost done. He is a very important artist for those who know art.
erica nechvatal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.57.34.12 ( talk • contribs) [06:02, 29 August 2006]
You are doing a good job with formatting and so on, but notability needs to be established. Some shows in major galleries would be good, or quotes from magazines or books about his work + reference for them. Please remember to be CIVIL. Tyrenius 14:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Birth date and place. Education details.
Do we take it his PhD was gained in 1997? Where are his shows in museums and galleries round the world as initially stated?
There still doesn't seem much to make him notable. Perhaps some material from the External links could be incorporated, and the link turned into a reference, instead of merely a link.
Tyrenius 09:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
(reposting comment which deleted other material)
Somebody puts this tag on top of the page I added images to: "The creator of or main contributor to this page may have a conflict of interest with the subject of this article. This page may be deleted unless it uses neutral language and cites independent, reliable, third-party sources that verify all content and show that the subject is notable. Please discuss further on the talk page."
Well, all of that has been resolved long ago. All I did was add 2 images.
Rydernechvatal
The images illustrate the text and the text has been vetted and verified. If you have noted art historians like Frank Popper pointing to the importance of his work in his book From Technological to Virtual Art, then why would you question his presence in wikipedia?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rydernechvatal ( talk • contribs)
OK. I understand. But really all the content at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nechvatal is objective, factual and historically acurate. (~~~~)
I see that this is still at the top of pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nechvatal and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Popper
"The creator of or main contributor to this page may have a conflict of interest with the subject of this article. This page may be deleted unless it uses neutral language and cites independent, reliable, third-party sources that verify all content and show that the subject is notable. Please discuss further on the talk page. This article has been tagged since May 2007."
As I pointed out yesterday, there is only neutral language and the information does cite independent, reliable, third-party sources that verify all content and show that the subject is notable.
Can you please remove the tags or allow me to do so?
Thank you
Rydernechvatal 12:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
What exactly is the purpose of the artist's photo? Is it an actual art piece, a self-portrait? If so, is it identified as such? It does not seem to add anything to the article. I have removed it twice and I really don't feel it should be placed back in, at least not without a discussion here. Also, it is helpful if Rydernechvatal would include edit summaries. I posted a note on his/her talk page. This is a matter of respect for other editors so we know edits, changes, deletions and reverts are being made in good faith (and this isn't an accusation of bad faith editing on Rydernechvatal's part, but it is hard to know what his or her intentions are without edit summaries). Thanks. Freshacconci 13:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Photo is of the artist and given to me with his approval. Don't you want his photo?
I do not know what edit summaries are. Sorry.
Rydernechvatal 14:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
This article is not written according to wikipedia's standards. It is written from the point of view of the artist or a close associate ofd the arist. User:Rydernechvatal should refrain from editing the article and put suggested changes on this page, so that other non-partisan editors can decide whether the material should be included. Tyrenius 14:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
++++
OK Well its been around 3 days now with the ugly {{COI|date=June 2007}} sign at the top of the page. The citations are given above. Will someone get rid of the {{COI|date=June 2007}}
Thank you very much
User rydernechvatal is up to bad behavior on wikipedia. Have a search for "nechvatal" on wikipedia and guess what you'll find? That one "Joseph Nechvatal" is one of the most significant artists of the late 20th century. According to whom? According to rydernechvatal, who has authored and edited dozens and dozens of articles so as to make this dubious point.
The fact that Nechvatal has exhibited internationally puts him in the company of thousands upon thousands of artists. This is not to devalue the artists work in any way, but to suggest that the artists fame on wikipedia is entirely created by himself, his daughter, or his comrades. Said search for "nechvatal" brings up countless links, many of exceedingly questionable merit. I must suggest that rydernechvatal's contributions be reviewed in their entirety. Given the extent of this fraud, I believe that wikipedia may face on ongoing struggle to keep Nechvatal or his cohort from mischief.-- Dylanfly 17:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Well I had the idea that adding content to wiki was what was expected. I fail to understand the "pure genius" comment other an attempt to be nasty. I may add that his 2 essays on Baudrillard were accepted for publication at the International Journal of Baudrillard Studies: http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/ so your testimony to their worthlessness seems silly and rather petty of you. Yes I created this page and 2 more (Frank Popper and Ebon Fisher) but after this experience there will be no more content supplied by me. There are NO claims of "global influence" - only specific facts concerning all three pages I created for you. If you object to my linking his early work to punk - then remove that reference but please stop your pettiness.
Rydernechvatal [07:38, 25 June 2007]
I think you dodge the issues at hand completely. The issue here is the integrity of the online encyclopedia. To place Nechvatal into the field of collage artists, on par with Matisse, is patently disrespectful to this project. There are thousands of artists who do collage, and very few deserve mention on Wikipedia. My brother is an artist but you won't find me putting him all over Wikipedia! He just doesn't have the stature required. That's not a criticism of his work (or of Nechvatal's), it's a statement about what an encyclopedia is for. May I suggest you build Nechvatal a nice MySpace page?
Similarly, to place a 2 page review on Baudrillard alongside the remarks of Susan Sontag is not helpful either. The point of the encyclopedia is not to list every possible thing connected to Baudrillard (in which case Nechvatal's piece would qualify); the point is to discuss and link things which help introduce and illuminate someone at the scale of an encyclopedia. There are thousands of published articles on Baudrillard and very, very few of them have a place on Wikipedia. The same is true of punk visual art and so on and so forth.
You really don't own up to any of this. This is why the charge of pettiness applies well to you: if you truly took responsibility, you would remove your additions and links yourself, rather than ditching this chore to the community. But that's the basic misunderstanding here: Wikipedia is not about individual promotion, by self by fans or by family, it's about a community of people building knowledge in a collaborative way.--Dylanfly 14:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC) [posted by User:Rydernechvatal]
Nechvatal, as a collagist, is discussed in Brandon Taylor's recent book "Collage" published by Thames & Hudson Ltd, 2006, p. 221. Perhaps your brother is in that book as well? Thus I have nothing to own up to.
For the first citation: He has also exhibited in Paris, Cologne, Alalst, Belgium, Lund and Munich and has participated in museum exhibitions around the world.[citation needed] -- see the artists CV here for list of exhibitions : http://www.eyewithwings.net/nechvatal/bio/bio.htm
For your 2nd citation for his work being in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.[citation needed] see: http://www.msstate.edu/Fineart_Online/Backissues/Vol_15/faf_v15_n04/text/review03.html
For #3: Art historian Donald Kuspit has written in his essay The Matrix of Sensations that Nechvatal's digital painting demonstrates that "there are more possibilities of freedom in digital art — that is, the "mental elements" are "free[r] to enter into various combinations" and thus to be manipulated — than in architecture, painting and sculpture."[citation needed]
see: http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/kuspit/kuspit8-5-05.asp which is cited in the reference section
For #4: Frank Popper states in his book From Technological to Virtual Art that Nechvatal's computer virus work is important to the history of art as it has advanced the use of digital technology and artificial intelligence, while defending and preserving the values of formal painting.[citation needed] see: Frank Popper From Technological to Virtual Art, MIT Press, pp. 120-123
This is also cited in the reference section
Does that help?
Rydernechvatal [07:38, 25 June 2007]
Ok It has been weeks now since multiple editors reworked this page (which I started on Joseph Nechvatal). I have asked for the COI tag to be removed by those that placed it there - but there has been no response. So I am going to remove it now.
81.57.34.12 [ Rydernechvatal ] 17:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
May I, or will you, remove the COI sign now? This page has been reviewed by numerous editors over the last month.
Rydernechvatal 07:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
This page has been reviewed and revised by numerous editors over the last month and I have requested that the editors who put a COI tag on it now remove it - but I have had no response or action taken. So I am removing it now myself.
Rydernechvatal 07:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
OK. I heard from my x-assistant Valueyou about what has been going on here and she encouraged me to weight in so I am. But I don't intend to work on Wikipedia directly after learning what a hornets nest that can be. Anyway, if you still would like Valueyou to continue working on Wikipedia, please lay off her. JosephNechvatal ( talk) 01:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I see no proof that there is no conflict of interest, besides Valueyou's claim that there is none. Paradoxically, Valueyou, while claiming there is no COI, has instead repeatedly claimed to have a connection with Nechvatal, proving there is probably a conflict of interest. For example, Valueyou contacted Nechvatal to have the latter edit multiple Wikipedia pages.
Furthermore, one may cite a published work (which others could access), but one may not site someone's unpublished notes (which no one else has access to). One cannot claim to have no connection with or interest in someone, and also claim to have access to that person's private and personal materials. A simple
declaration of interest would be much more convincing than an unsupported denial, and would prove objectivity better than an unsupported claim of objectivity.
Hyacinth (
talk)
19:42, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the claim that there are two outside testimonials, two anonymous people who are personally involved with Nechvatal and Valueyou only compounds the conflict of interest, assuming that these two people are not Nechvatal or Valueyou. Nechvatal, perhaps you would find Wikipedia being a "hornet's nest" less painful if you didn't beat the nest with a stick. Hyacinth ( talk) 19:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
This is a notice that I have marked three images on this page as needing permission. The images are:
While they all say that the artwork has been released into the public domain by the artist that is not enough to prove that they are licensed under something that can be used. If the artist does wish to license them under this license they must fill out a
WP:CONSENT form and email it into permissions-enwikimedia.org. The images have been marked for deletion and will be deleted in 7 days if the email has not been sent in by that time. If the proof has been sent, notice must be placed on the image pages by putting {{subst:OP}} on the page. Since the uploader has not edited Wikipedia in quite a long time I wanted to post this here as well to make anyone watching this page aware of the situation. If anyone has any questions please feel free to let me know on my talk page or you can {{
ping}} me here. Thanks. --
Majora (
talk)
02:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
There are three accounts involved in direct editing the article that contains the name Nechvatal: JosephNechvatal, Rydernechvatal and EricaNechvatal. Rydernechvatal ( talk · contribs) made considerble contribution to this article, as did someone who says they're Joseph Nechvatal's "x-assistant". Graywalls ( talk) 18:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
@ Hyacinth and Smilo Don: (Smilon Don was Dylanfly) requesting if they have any comment as previous participants. I stand by my placement of "autobio", as having been written by the subject, or those closely associated with the subject. Whether to use COI or Autobio tag is debatable.
Here's added text stats:
Valueyou · 17,971 (37.7%) (Editor states they were a Nechvatal's employee from 2008-2011)
Taxisfolder · 2,227 (4.7%) (former account of Valueyou, according to prior editors)
Erica:
EricaNechvatal · 1,276 (2.7%) (created the page)
81.57.34.12 · 7,692 (16.2%) (Erica Nechvatal, per the name they signed in one of talk page comments claiming ownership to the page)
A Nechvatal:
Rydernechvatal · 5,787 (12.2%) (obvious Nechvatal)
Total 73.5%
Freshacconci · 4,960 (10.4%) (not sure?) (comment: while I don't think or never suspected they have COI. I was only listing out the top additions, but since one editor took this as "alleging a coi", I have struck this out, specifically to avoid any further confusion.
Graywalls (
talk)
19:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Those with reasonably certain connections to Nechvatal are responsible for 3/4 of addition to the article. Graywalls ( talk) 18:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Why am I mentioned in this discussion? Hyacinth ( talk) 22:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Is there any example of bias in the article content? Hyacinth ( talk) 23:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
There seems to be a small edit war dispute going on in relation to this statement: "Nechvatal cites influences such as
John von Neumann,
John Horton Conway,
John Koza,
Gustav Metzger and
Marcel Duchamp.
[1]
@
Graywalls and
Vexations: I don't see anything particularly undue about this, nor is it problematic that it's a primary source (interview). I'd suggest leaving it in. ---
Possibly (
talk)
19:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
References