This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Embrace 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 |
Archives: 1 |
A fact from The Embrace appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 16 March 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Can anyone find reviews of this sculpture by independent art critics? (That is, professional critics who were not involved in commissioning the statue nor associated with the artist.) -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Not so far, but here is a newspaper article that is less one-sided than the ones quoted in the article. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/01/16/metro/marveling-embrace-bostonians-celebrate-superhero-martin-luther-king-jr-day/ Dirca palustris ( talk) 02:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Various sources (as well as plenty of online discourse, but I know we stick with reliable sources) mention people have compared the statue from certain angles to a penis. 2803:4600:1116:12E7:250F:EC4F:BDAF:438E ( talk) 20:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
From here, I'd say it's mostly negative. Especially on Black Twitter and in Black media. The criticism is frank and brutal. Almost no one is liking this thing. The King Center is totally silent. I guess the wording here is going to shift over the coming days and weeks, depending on spin control and who gets the shiniest sources to say what. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 22:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
I was physically at the Embrace on Memorial Day and I didn't encounter any negative opinions from the crowds going through and taking photos. I will admit that it looks much better in person than it appears in photographs. But it's a wonderful statue in person and a joy to walk through. The last sentence of the first paragraph is unwarranted based on my first-hand experiences on site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB91:F6C:41C0:55B1:FCFD:D9D6:FD2B ( talk) 01:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Cielquiparle (
talk)
12:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Created by MagicatthemovieS ( talk) and Another Believer ( talk). Nominated by MagicatthemovieS ( talk) at 15:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC).
The artist, along with Seneca Scott, were interviewed by The Guardian this week, their answers definitely complicate a bit of the narrative. Don't know how this should be incorporated, flagging for review. Article 19h00s ( talk) 17:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
I noticed that the image for this article is perhaps unnecessarily dark and pixelated. While still following fair-use procedure, I believe that this image could provide a meaningful improvement to the article. Tyxcho ( talk) 15:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
The article rightly includes criticism of the sculpture being of arms only, but doesn't say why the unusual decision to make the statue that way was reached. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 12:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
weight listed under weight is 400000 lbs. Under description it says 19 tons. 19 tons ≠ 400000 lbs 2601:197:B80:33F0:FCCE:D55F:8B78:7225 ( talk) 13:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Embrace 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 |
Archives: 1 |
A fact from The Embrace appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 16 March 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Can anyone find reviews of this sculpture by independent art critics? (That is, professional critics who were not involved in commissioning the statue nor associated with the artist.) -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Not so far, but here is a newspaper article that is less one-sided than the ones quoted in the article. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/01/16/metro/marveling-embrace-bostonians-celebrate-superhero-martin-luther-king-jr-day/ Dirca palustris ( talk) 02:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Various sources (as well as plenty of online discourse, but I know we stick with reliable sources) mention people have compared the statue from certain angles to a penis. 2803:4600:1116:12E7:250F:EC4F:BDAF:438E ( talk) 20:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
From here, I'd say it's mostly negative. Especially on Black Twitter and in Black media. The criticism is frank and brutal. Almost no one is liking this thing. The King Center is totally silent. I guess the wording here is going to shift over the coming days and weeks, depending on spin control and who gets the shiniest sources to say what. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 22:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
I was physically at the Embrace on Memorial Day and I didn't encounter any negative opinions from the crowds going through and taking photos. I will admit that it looks much better in person than it appears in photographs. But it's a wonderful statue in person and a joy to walk through. The last sentence of the first paragraph is unwarranted based on my first-hand experiences on site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB91:F6C:41C0:55B1:FCFD:D9D6:FD2B ( talk) 01:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Cielquiparle (
talk)
12:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Created by MagicatthemovieS ( talk) and Another Believer ( talk). Nominated by MagicatthemovieS ( talk) at 15:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC).
The artist, along with Seneca Scott, were interviewed by The Guardian this week, their answers definitely complicate a bit of the narrative. Don't know how this should be incorporated, flagging for review. Article 19h00s ( talk) 17:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
I noticed that the image for this article is perhaps unnecessarily dark and pixelated. While still following fair-use procedure, I believe that this image could provide a meaningful improvement to the article. Tyxcho ( talk) 15:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
The article rightly includes criticism of the sculpture being of arms only, but doesn't say why the unusual decision to make the statue that way was reached. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 12:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
weight listed under weight is 400000 lbs. Under description it says 19 tons. 19 tons ≠ 400000 lbs 2601:197:B80:33F0:FCCE:D55F:8B78:7225 ( talk) 13:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)