- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: keep . Preferably with the added context and citation discussed in this MfD. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 16:20, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Portal:Visual arts/Selected quote/8
Offensive and unsourced. Can we please NOT have this in our " doorway into Wikipedia's coverage on art"?
Vexations (
talk) 02:17, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NOTCENSORED. A fan of pop art might find Portal:Visual arts/Selected quote/9 equally offensive but that would not be grounds to remove it either. Appropriate grounds for deletion are e.g. if the quote is arcane or by an artist who is barely relevant. — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 05:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Portal talk:Visual arts has been notified of this discussion. — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 05:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Keep. This is an out-of-scope attempt to micromanage a portal. Weird stuff is ok in the visual arts. This quote is weird. I recommend to them that they achieve it due to failure of verifiability. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 11:11, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Nonsense. See
Wikipedia:Offensive material
... should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available
I do take your point about micromanaging a portal. I'll take it to the project to see if we can find something better. Request for deletion withdrawn. Vexations ( talk) 12:52, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Strong keepper WP:NOTCENSORED. If Renoir in fact said that (a source would not come amiss) hen we should have it as helping to illuminate the attitudes of very well-noted artists to their subject matter. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 21:07, 16 June 2018 (UTC)- Modify to conditional keep. The alleged offensiveness of the quote should have no bering on it being kept or deleted. However if there is truly a scholarly dispute on the accuracy of the quote, or if it cannot be cited to a relaible source, it might be inhclude in an article where it can get proper context, but should not be a free-standing quote here. However, if it can be adaquetly sourced to Renoir, it should be kept as indicated in my initial view. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 12:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Seriously? What is this? Look at us being all heroic and manly standing up to censorship and illuminating the totally unknown fact that the 19th century was a pretty awful time for artist models by quoting sexist artists saying embarrassing things without contextualizing that quote? Anyway, in case you hadn't noticed, I had WITHDRAWN the nomination, but I'll offer a replacement:
| “ | Even when I had a fellowship for painting, some of my teachers were very hostile. 'You're taking this too seriously. You're only a girl. Don't set your heart on art.' My boyfriends in college stole my brushes and my books, like, 'We need this more than you do.' | ” |
| — Carolee Schneeman, Rose, Steve (2014-03-10). "Carolee Schneemann: 'I never thought I was shocking'". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-06-17. |
Vexations ( talk) 00:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- It is a great quote for shining light on historical sexism. The arts are great for this. A source is needed or it shouldn’t be used. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 01:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe we can change the quote to a quote that can be sourced: "I paint with my prick" ("Je peins avec ma queue")) in Renoir, Jean (1962).
"Renoir, my father". Little, Brown.
Vexations (
talk) 02:28, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- I don’t see that quote at your source. Are introducing deliberate falsehoods. That is a blockable offence. Whether a quote is good to use in a portal, I suggest, depends on first it being verified, and second on others repeating the quote. One of the worst things to happen in Portals is WP:OR. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 02:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Really? OK. I suggest that for a portal to use a quote, reliable sources should have also used the quote. Any nonsense can be a quote. If “selected quote 8” has not previously been quoted by anyone reputable, Wikipedia should not be quoting it. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 03:04, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Look, I'm making light of this situation, but I'm not making any of this up, an in fact there is considerable debate about whether Renoir said exactly that, or said something slightly different. The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations lists is as a misquotation. The more representative quote is probably "It's with my brush that I make love." (C'est avec mon pinceau que... j'aime), which is much better known. The stuff about touching women butts probably is derived from "Moi j'aime les tableaux qui me donnent envie de me balader dedans, lorsque c'est un paysage, ou bien de passer ma main sur un téton ou sur un dos, si c'est une figure de femme... Corot avait des mots très crus pour exprimer cela.". Anyway, I'd really like to see this MfD closed as "withdrawn" or "keep", but from reading Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Administrator_instructions# it doesn't look like I can do that myself by withdrawing the nomination.
-
DESiegel since you appear to be the only admin participating so far, would you please be so kind to close this MfD and put it out of its misery?
Vexations (
talk) 03:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose an early close. In investigation, the proposal to delete looks justified. —04:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- I don’t see that quote at your source. Are introducing deliberate falsehoods. That is a blockable offence. Whether a quote is good to use in a portal, I suggest, depends on first it being verified, and second on others repeating the quote. One of the worst things to happen in Portals is WP:OR. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 02:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- As one who has expressed a view above,
Vexations, I should not close it. And since an editor (who should sign the comment) has now posted favoring deletion, a withdrawn or snow keep early close is not appropriate. Moreover If the quote cannot be supported with a source, then it should be deleted. I implied that above, but then i supposed that the source was well-known, just not cited.
DES
(talk)
DESiegel Contribs 13:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
-
DESiegel Well, I made the request before SmokeyJoe struck his keep. Sure you'd be involved, but that wouldn't matter because you're doing
the withdrawal on my behalf and at my request. Too late now. I don't quite understand your reasoning. You said "Strong Keep", but now you say
If the quote cannot be supported with a source, then it should be deleted
? Anyway, I think I may be able to resolve that, because I think it can be sourced. The quote is not a paraphrase of the quote I mentioned earlier, but is translated from "Voyons, quand j’ai peint une fesse et que j’ai envie de taper dessus, c’est qu’elle est finie". (I'd translate "taper les fesses" as "pat her butt", not the prudish "touch her buttocks" BTW). It can be sourced to Bonafoux, Pascal (2009). Renoir: 1841-1919 (in French). Paris: Perrin. p. 246. ISBN 9782262027315.. Now you have your source. Vexations ( talk) 18:49, 17 June 2018 (UTC)- Thannks for the source, Vexations. My initial view was based upon the assumption that sourcing was just a matter of citing a well-known quote. Then there were indications that the quote was disputed, and that altered my view. Now it seems that we have a solid source. I would add that if the translation is to be by a Wikipedia, or is not itself sourcable, then the original French quote should also be supplied. I would agree that in context "fesse" should be translated by a more colloquial term than "buttocks", although it has been a long time since I did any significant reading of French. I hope tht clarifies my view. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 12:35, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
-
DESiegel Well, I made the request before SmokeyJoe struck his keep. Sure you'd be involved, but that wouldn't matter because you're doing
the withdrawal on my behalf and at my request. Too late now. I don't quite understand your reasoning. You said "Strong Keep", but now you say
- Conditioal keep. If a reliable source can be cited then keep, otherwise delete. If there is no cite by the closing of this discussion, then delete, with the proviso that if a relable source is found it can bw reinstated without further debate. No different to any other challenged content really. Use of sub-articles should not make removal of challenged material any different from a statment in any other article. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: keep . Preferably with the added context and citation discussed in this MfD. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 16:20, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Portal:Visual arts/Selected quote/8
Offensive and unsourced. Can we please NOT have this in our " doorway into Wikipedia's coverage on art"?
Vexations (
talk) 02:17, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NOTCENSORED. A fan of pop art might find Portal:Visual arts/Selected quote/9 equally offensive but that would not be grounds to remove it either. Appropriate grounds for deletion are e.g. if the quote is arcane or by an artist who is barely relevant. — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 05:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Portal talk:Visual arts has been notified of this discussion. — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 05:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Keep. This is an out-of-scope attempt to micromanage a portal. Weird stuff is ok in the visual arts. This quote is weird. I recommend to them that they achieve it due to failure of verifiability. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 11:11, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Nonsense. See
Wikipedia:Offensive material
... should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available
I do take your point about micromanaging a portal. I'll take it to the project to see if we can find something better. Request for deletion withdrawn. Vexations ( talk) 12:52, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Strong keepper WP:NOTCENSORED. If Renoir in fact said that (a source would not come amiss) hen we should have it as helping to illuminate the attitudes of very well-noted artists to their subject matter. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 21:07, 16 June 2018 (UTC)- Modify to conditional keep. The alleged offensiveness of the quote should have no bering on it being kept or deleted. However if there is truly a scholarly dispute on the accuracy of the quote, or if it cannot be cited to a relaible source, it might be inhclude in an article where it can get proper context, but should not be a free-standing quote here. However, if it can be adaquetly sourced to Renoir, it should be kept as indicated in my initial view. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 12:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Seriously? What is this? Look at us being all heroic and manly standing up to censorship and illuminating the totally unknown fact that the 19th century was a pretty awful time for artist models by quoting sexist artists saying embarrassing things without contextualizing that quote? Anyway, in case you hadn't noticed, I had WITHDRAWN the nomination, but I'll offer a replacement:
| “ | Even when I had a fellowship for painting, some of my teachers were very hostile. 'You're taking this too seriously. You're only a girl. Don't set your heart on art.' My boyfriends in college stole my brushes and my books, like, 'We need this more than you do.' | ” |
| — Carolee Schneeman, Rose, Steve (2014-03-10). "Carolee Schneemann: 'I never thought I was shocking'". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-06-17. |
Vexations ( talk) 00:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- It is a great quote for shining light on historical sexism. The arts are great for this. A source is needed or it shouldn’t be used. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 01:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe we can change the quote to a quote that can be sourced: "I paint with my prick" ("Je peins avec ma queue")) in Renoir, Jean (1962).
"Renoir, my father". Little, Brown.
Vexations (
talk) 02:28, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- I don’t see that quote at your source. Are introducing deliberate falsehoods. That is a blockable offence. Whether a quote is good to use in a portal, I suggest, depends on first it being verified, and second on others repeating the quote. One of the worst things to happen in Portals is WP:OR. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 02:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Really? OK. I suggest that for a portal to use a quote, reliable sources should have also used the quote. Any nonsense can be a quote. If “selected quote 8” has not previously been quoted by anyone reputable, Wikipedia should not be quoting it. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 03:04, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Look, I'm making light of this situation, but I'm not making any of this up, an in fact there is considerable debate about whether Renoir said exactly that, or said something slightly different. The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations lists is as a misquotation. The more representative quote is probably "It's with my brush that I make love." (C'est avec mon pinceau que... j'aime), which is much better known. The stuff about touching women butts probably is derived from "Moi j'aime les tableaux qui me donnent envie de me balader dedans, lorsque c'est un paysage, ou bien de passer ma main sur un téton ou sur un dos, si c'est une figure de femme... Corot avait des mots très crus pour exprimer cela.". Anyway, I'd really like to see this MfD closed as "withdrawn" or "keep", but from reading Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Administrator_instructions# it doesn't look like I can do that myself by withdrawing the nomination.
-
DESiegel since you appear to be the only admin participating so far, would you please be so kind to close this MfD and put it out of its misery?
Vexations (
talk) 03:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose an early close. In investigation, the proposal to delete looks justified. —04:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- I don’t see that quote at your source. Are introducing deliberate falsehoods. That is a blockable offence. Whether a quote is good to use in a portal, I suggest, depends on first it being verified, and second on others repeating the quote. One of the worst things to happen in Portals is WP:OR. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 02:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- As one who has expressed a view above,
Vexations, I should not close it. And since an editor (who should sign the comment) has now posted favoring deletion, a withdrawn or snow keep early close is not appropriate. Moreover If the quote cannot be supported with a source, then it should be deleted. I implied that above, but then i supposed that the source was well-known, just not cited.
DES
(talk)
DESiegel Contribs 13:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
-
DESiegel Well, I made the request before SmokeyJoe struck his keep. Sure you'd be involved, but that wouldn't matter because you're doing
the withdrawal on my behalf and at my request. Too late now. I don't quite understand your reasoning. You said "Strong Keep", but now you say
If the quote cannot be supported with a source, then it should be deleted
? Anyway, I think I may be able to resolve that, because I think it can be sourced. The quote is not a paraphrase of the quote I mentioned earlier, but is translated from "Voyons, quand j’ai peint une fesse et que j’ai envie de taper dessus, c’est qu’elle est finie". (I'd translate "taper les fesses" as "pat her butt", not the prudish "touch her buttocks" BTW). It can be sourced to Bonafoux, Pascal (2009). Renoir: 1841-1919 (in French). Paris: Perrin. p. 246. ISBN 9782262027315.. Now you have your source. Vexations ( talk) 18:49, 17 June 2018 (UTC)- Thannks for the source, Vexations. My initial view was based upon the assumption that sourcing was just a matter of citing a well-known quote. Then there were indications that the quote was disputed, and that altered my view. Now it seems that we have a solid source. I would add that if the translation is to be by a Wikipedia, or is not itself sourcable, then the original French quote should also be supplied. I would agree that in context "fesse" should be translated by a more colloquial term than "buttocks", although it has been a long time since I did any significant reading of French. I hope tht clarifies my view. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 12:35, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
-
DESiegel Well, I made the request before SmokeyJoe struck his keep. Sure you'd be involved, but that wouldn't matter because you're doing
the withdrawal on my behalf and at my request. Too late now. I don't quite understand your reasoning. You said "Strong Keep", but now you say
- Conditioal keep. If a reliable source can be cited then keep, otherwise delete. If there is no cite by the closing of this discussion, then delete, with the proviso that if a relable source is found it can bw reinstated without further debate. No different to any other challenged content really. Use of sub-articles should not make removal of challenged material any different from a statment in any other article. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.