Talk:Warhol's photo legacy spread by university exhibits
Add topic
This article is a featured article.
It is considered one of the best works of the Wikinews community.
See the archived discussion.
Focus
[edit]The main idea is that the dissemination of Andy Warhol's photography is decentralized. The strategy is overseen by Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program, which part of the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts. This story will use the exhibit opening at USI's McCutchan Art Center/Pace Galleries on 23 January as the current back drop. Crtew (talk) 17:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Documentation assistance for editor
[edit]First section
[edit]The focus was constructed from a combination of website, see above focus, and the press release from USI with verification from the USI art gallery's web site. The event press release was visible on the front page of the USI web site. The lede uses these same materials but adds the 26,000 art objects mentioned by Curator Kristen Wilkins, see notes below under section "Exhibit," as well as a statement by Director Kathryn Waters that USI Art Collections would like more donations from the foundation in the future, see notes below under section "Interview: Director of gallery". By the way, Polaroid is always capitalized because it's named after the company.
Second section
[edit]The 2007 can be found under section "Background information", in "Emails: KC Maurer", and in remarks from Wilkins at the opening under section "Exhibit". A representative of the Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts was contacted by email and you can check with the interview notes here under the section "Emails: KC Maurer". The other exhibits can be checked by looking at the articles about other exhibits in section ""Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program" and are sourced in the article. We double checked the University of North Carolina at Greensboro website to make sure that this was the correct way to write it with the "at" in the name, and alternatively it can be written UNC Greensboro. The information about its exhibit can be found under "Emails: Elaine Gustafon UNC Greensboro, NC".
Third section
[edit]At the top of the third section on "Superstars", we returned to the same interview with Elaine Gustafon. Under the exhibit section below, you will find our notes for the subjects of the Polaroids on display in the collection. Kristen Wilkin's comment can be checked with her comments below under "Exhibit". About the list, we decided to only include those celebrities notable enough to have Wikipedia articles because of the Wikinews relationship, notability standards and linking, which adds depth to the article. We then refer to the Cynthia Thompson interview. See: "Emails: Cynthia Thompson UA".
Fourth section
[edit]The whole idea behind this section was to gather opinions from experts about Warhol's importance in photography because that is not widely seen as his main contribution. However, we were surprised at the responses! The information about pop art (not capitalized unless at the Pop is at the start of the sentence) is mentioned by both Wilkins and Waters. We used the quote from the interview with Waters in the section below, "Interview with Kathryn Waters". Professor Hilary Braysmith was interviewed at the exhibit and her comments are found transcribed notes found in section "Exhibit". Wilkins comments from the scanned notes that we made available below. She mentions the Annie Oakley screen print in the audio, which is posted already in the article.
Fifth section
[edit]The idea for this section was to return back to the exhibit mentioned above in good Wall Street Journal "hour glass" structure style. Wilkins has described what would happen at the exhibit in the audio on the article page. There is also visual proof for all the elements Katie Waters mentions as features of the exhibit as well as further confirmation of exhibit descriptions. For those parts of the exhibit we observed but couldn't document, like the people taking photos of their Polaroids. We use the European & UK name for the US "cell phone", or the mobile, for global recognition.
Plan for original reporting
[edit]This is a collaborative reporting assignment to be carried out by Dr. Chad Tew's (Contact: User:Crtew) "Online Journalism" class at the University of Southern Indiana. Students will be assigned specific reporting and writing initiatives based upon the following plan. We will achieve transparency by documenting our reporting on this page, including notes, interviews, and multimedia and following the outline below, which is intended also to assist editors in tracking original reporting and linking the pieces to the content.Crtew (talk) 17:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Overall themes running through the article are Warhol's photographic contributions & the various education initiatives and strategies to communicate them.
- Topic: Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program
- Topic: Exhibit
Topic: "Silver Clouds" installationBackground: Warhol's photographyBackground: PolaroidInterview Andy Warhol expert(replaced by curators)- Interview representative from Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program
- Interview USI exhibit curator
- Interview head of USI gallery
- Video interviews/b-roll of event (The edited version was posted to the article)
- Audio narration and interviews with museum goers (transcribed below)
- Original photography: Event (presented at bottom)
- Fair Use of an example piece (Dennis Hopper Polaroid)
Graphic: Comparison map of participating universities with Warhol photography exhibits around the United StatesGraphic: Warhol's photography timeline
Lede
[edit]Main article:
- Press Release: Wendy Bredhold. "USI's Warhol collection goes on display January 23" — USI News and Information Services, January 7, 2014
Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program
[edit]The list of universities that have received donations of Warhol photographs can be found at [1].
Other exhibits:
- Tom Mullaney. "Steichen and Warhol together at Block Museum" — Crain's Chicago Business, January 15, 2014
- Thomas Dimopoulos. "Andy Warhol Legacy Comes To Saratoga" — Saratoga Wire, December 27 2013
Background information / Fame vs. the unknowns
[edit]The Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program donated over 28,000 photos (both black and white 8x10s and Polaroids) to 190 colleges and universities around the country beginning in from 2007 to 2010.
The Andy Warhol Foundation invited approximately 500 institutions to participate in the program, provided they met certain requirements. Recipients had to have appropriate storage facilities, had to agree to exhibit a substantial portion of the works at least once every ten years and had to make the works widely available for study purposes.
Schools across the country have hosted exhibits showcasing photographs from their collections, and some have focused on specific aspects of Warhol's work. In 2010, University of North Carolina Greensboro paired with UNC Chapel Hill and Duke University to exhibit pieces from all three of their collections.
The special collaborative exhibit, entitlted Big Shots: Andy Warhol's Polaroids, focused on Warhol's preoccupation with fame, and featured pictures of celebrities like Truman Capote, Carly Simon, Farrah Fawcett, Bianca Jagger, Diane Lane and others.
“I think America's obsession with celebrity culture is as strong today as it was when Warhol was living,” said Elaine Gustason, curator of collections at UNC Greensboro. “People are still intrigued by how stars live, dress and socialize, since it is so different from most people's every day lives.”
The Polaroids and prints of celebrities only make up a fraction of every school's overall collection though, and some institutions value the rarer images.
“Warhol photographed famous people as well as 'unknowns,'” said Cynthia Thompson, curator and director of exhibitions at the University of Arkansas. “These images serve as documentation of people in his everyday life and art - one which many of us enjoy a glimpse into.”
Other exhibits and the second gift
[edit]Schools across the country have also integrated pieces from their Warhol collections into larger exhibits. In January 2014, the Zimmerli Art Museum at Rutgers University launched an exhibit called Striking Resemblance, which charts the evolution of the portrait and integrates pieces from its Warhol gift.
USI was one of 184 institutions to accept a second gift from the Andy Warhol Foundation in the summer of 2013.
“It was not a gift of more B&W 8x10 photographic prints, but screenprints,” said KC Maurer, chief financial officer and treasurer at the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts. “The Foundation’s Board decided to make the gift of screenprints in honor of the Foundation’s 25thanniversary.”
The exhibit at USI is a combination of both the Polaroids and the newly acquired screenprints.
Emails from various colleges about Warol collections
[edit]Original reporting from Rachel:
I've contacted about 30 different schools that participated in the program by email so the article can have a larger perspective. From the information I gathered, something interesting emerged.
The University of North Carolina, Greensboro partnered up with Duke University and UNC, Chapel Hill to put on a kind of mega exhibit that focused on all three school's celebrity and socialite photos. They had pictures of Truman Capote, Carly Simon, Diane Lane, Farrah Fawcett, a couple others. The curator of collections at UNCGB said a lot of the people are still into Warhol's work because the concept of fame is so different from our own lives. In contrast, when I spoke to Cynthia Thompson, curator and director of exhibits at the University of Arkansas, she said some of the most valued pieces of the collection for their school are the ones of "unknowns." I got a nice quote from her about it: "These images serve as documentation of people in his every day life and art - one which many of us enjoy a glimpse into." It might be good to emphasis the diversity of the Legacy donations through these examples. It will also show how the program has allowed schools the freedom to create unique exhibits that focus or are complimented by aspects of his work.
Emails: Cynthia Thompson UA
[edit]Email from Cynthia Thompson, director and curator of exhibitions at the University of Arkansas (20 Jan 2014)
"For one, many of these photographs have never been seen before. Warhol photographed famous people as well as 'unknowns'. These images serve as documentation of people in his everyday life and art- one which many of us enjoy a glimpse into."
Emails: Elaine Gustafon UNC Greensboro, NC
[edit]Email from Elaine Gustafon,curator of collections at the Weatherspoon Art Museum at the University of North Carolina Greensboro (21 Jan 2014)
"The polaroids came into the Weatherspoon's collection in 2008, but due to the logistics involved in accessioning them, we did not exhibit them until 2010. At that time we paired up with two other university museums (the Nasher at Duke Univ. and the Ackland at UNC, Chapel Hill) to exhibit the majority of works that were donated to all of us. As a result, we were able to illustrate better Warhol's interest in celebrity culture, specifically the models, actors, sports heroes, and socialites who populated Warhol’s world...
"I particularly like our example of Truman Capote and Carly Simon...We have only shown the collection in most of its entirety once, but that exhibition was well received by the public. Over 11,000 people visited the museum during its run...
"I think America's obsession with celebrity culture is as strong today as it was when Warhol was living. People are still intrigued by how stars live, dress, and socialize, since it is so different from most people's every day lives."
.... said Elaine Gustason, curator of collections at the University of North Carolina Greensboro.
Emails: Wendy Livingston, Duke Univ
[edit]Emails from Wendy Livingston, manager of marketing and communications of the Nasher Museum of Art at Duke University (21-22 Jan. 2014).
"Our Warhol exhibition from 2009 is relevant (http://nasher.duke.edu/exhibitions/bigshots/), but we received another Warhol gift in early 2014...It turns out that all of the university galleries and art museums that received the Warhol gift of Polaroids and gelatin prints in 2009 were offered more prints as a second gift. So the Nasher Museum of Art at Duke University was not alone in that...
"The three art museums—the Nasher Museum of Ar, the Ackland Art Museum and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill—collaborated on selecting images for the traveling exhibition and also shared the cost of framing the Polaroids in clusters...And we’ll have more Warhols up in the spring, all gifts from the foundation."
Interview representative from Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program
[edit]Emails: KC Maurer (Andy Warhol Foundation)
[edit]Emails from KC Maurer,chief financial officer and treasurer at the Andy Warhol Foundation (21-22 Jan 2014)
"We sent letters to approximately 500 institutions inviting them to participate in the program, provided they met certain requirements. Recipients had to have a collection, had to have appropriate storage facilities, had to agree to exhibit a substantial portion of the works at least once every 10 years, and had to make the works widely available for study purposes...
"Yes, all 190 of the university museums and galleries that received a gift of Polaroids and black and white photographic prints were offered a gift of screenprints this past summer. So it was not a gift of more B&W 8x10 photographic prints, but screenprints. 184 institutions decided to participate. The Foundation’s Board decided to make the gift of screenprints in honor of the Foundation’s 25th anniversary...
"The correct number of institutions that received the gift of Polaroids and B&W photographic prints is 190. The Foundation began making gifts of photos in 2007. The last gifts of photos were made in early 2010."
Exhibit
[edit]
Reporter User:Rshipman1's transcribed notes from his digital voice recorder (equipment choice did not allow for transfers).
Kevin Allton, Intructor in English “Andy Warhol was like the center of the Zeitgeist for the 20th century and everything since. He is a post-modern diety.”
“I especially like the silver clouds. I’d seen it on film before and I thought that in real life it really kind of magical” “I smacked them around.” He had been to many exhibits at USI but has never seen such a large social turnout -“This is a real testament to Andy Warhol's importance.”
Kristen Wilkens, curator:
“Andy Warhol is famous for pop-art, pop art being is art based on popular culture." The Warhol foundation had their 20th anniversary in 2007, unfortunately its been 20 years since he passed away. (paraphrased)
“They had these photographs and they decided they’d distribute some of the photographs to institutions, such as USI. And they distributed something like 26,000 photographs.”
“So we are also becoming part of the Andy Warhol legacy that we can help support, because if you think about just the effort of taking care of all these photos, that all of these universities across the country are becoming apart of that legacy so that’s really excellent.”
“When it came to this exhibition and which images do we show, because we have a little bit more images than we have wall-space for, we kind of had to narrow it down a little bit.”
“Of course these photographs are not what you know Andy Warhol from.”
“When he was a kid he obsessively collected head-shots of movie stars, he is very interested in the glamour and the glitz-you can see a lot of black and white images or kind of party scenes, black tie events.”
“as a way to commercialize his work-he would make a blue Marilyn and a pink Marilyn and a yellow Marilyn and then you could pick your favorite color and buy that. It was a very practical salesman approach to his work. He was very prolific but very business minded about that.”
“When it came to hanging these works we were trying to make a nice pacing for you guys to come into his world.”
“I was particularly excited hanging some of these sets of Polaroid’s up-if you walk and look at how the series is laid out-they almost read like film. It is very much like video art and you can actually kind of see how the model was being manipulated.”
Kiara Perkins, Studio Art Major, Sculpture Major, Sophomore
“I think it amazing how well kept all of the art has been throughout the years, I really like the photographs of the unidentified people, I think those are the coolest.” -just got into the art department over here
“Its Warhol he is a legend.” -first time being in an art exhibit of this caliber
“I was actually surprise at how much they have.”
“I was going to skip class to come but then my class ended, I love art I could hours in an art gallery just being able to see, and be up close to art that is legendary and everyone knows it is just amazing, especially in Evansville, we don’t have a lot of art around here.”
“To me art is the rawest form of human expression, its animalistic and instinctual and I love to think about the colors used in art and the lines and everything –I love the history of it and the evolution off art.”
Hilary Braysmith. Associate Professor of Art History at USI
“My area is modern European so I obviously know a lot about modern American and contemporary American but I am not a scholar of that period. From my perspective, I think his photography is equally influential as his graphic works, his more famous pictures of Marilyn. In terms of the evolution of photography and experimentation, like painting on them or the celebrity fascination, I think he was really ground-breaking in that regard.”
Interview: Curator of exhibit
[edit]The audio part of the interview of Kristen Wilkins in the story was conducted by User:Jkthom on January 17, 2014. It is posted in full.
The following notes also come from the interview with Wilkins as reported by User:JustinRLaw:
Interview: Director of gallery
[edit]Original reporting from User:Dkmarshall:
Interview with Kathryn Waters, Professor of Art and Director of the McCutchan Art Center/Pace Galleries at University of Southern Indiana
“One of the criteria of us accepting these artworks is we would show them at least once every ten years,” Waters said. “And we do have more, and of course we are hoping they will give us more in the next ten years.”
“Pop art was about what popular American culture really thought was important,” Waters said. “That’s why he did the Campbell soup cans or the Marilyn pictures, these iconic products of American culture whether they be in film, video or actually products we consumed. So even back in the 60s he was very aware of this part of our culture. Which as we all know in 2014, has only increased probably a 1000 fold.”
“I think everybody knows Andy Warhol’s name, even non-art people, that’s a name they might know because he was such a personality,” Water said. “This gallery has only been here five years so its relatively new and I bet a lot people on campus don’t know it here because it’s tucked away in the back.”
“I would just say come, experience, enjoy, get your picture taken and we part of the art,” Waters said.
Video interviews
[edit]Video shot after 6 p.m., January 23, 2014 at the opening of "Andy Warhol: Photographs and Prints from the University Collection," exhibited by the McCutchan Art Center/Pace Galleries, University of Southern Indiana with credit to Wikinewsies User:Miharris and Acphillips.
Photography
[edit]Photographs were taken by User:Snbehnke. The photoediting and layout was done by Sskerchief
Fair use photography
[edit]Dennis Hopper Polaroid orginated from this news release
- Wendy Bredhold. "USI's Warhol collection goes on display January 23" — USI News and Information Services, January 7, 2014
Comment Fair use has to be fair, which includes not using a larger-sized version than needed. I've cropped most of the white either side of the Hopper portrait, and downscaled it considerably. Plus, by specifying a size (xxxpx), the 'tightened' caption should look better, and include the relevant templates and markup. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Graphic: Warhol's photography timeline
[edit]The graphic design was created by User:Decurry.
- "Warhol:Timeline" — Tate,
Image credits (Wikimedia Commons):
- File:Warhol Exhibition, The MAC, Belfast, April 2013 (08).JPG / User:Ardfern
- File:Warhol_Exhibition,_The_MAC,_Belfast,_April_2013_(07).JPG / User:Ardfern
- File:Warhol Exhibition, The MAC, Belfast, April 2013 (14).JPG / User:Ardfern
- File:Warhol Exhibition, The MAC, Belfast, April 2013 (13).JPG / User:Ardfern
- File:Andy Warhol (7000530927).jpg / Uploader: User:AlbertHerring / Source: Roanoke College
- File:Ford A5345 NLGRF photo contact sheet (1975-07-02)(Gerald Ford Library).jpg /Source: White House Photographic Office
- File:Warhol_Exhibition,_The_MAC,_Belfast,_April_2013_(09).JPG / User:Ardfern
File:Lisa Sotilis photographed by Andy Warhol.jpg / Source: Andy Warhol / Courtesy of Lisa Sotilis
Reviews, comments and other feedback
[edit]Review of revision 2344468 [Not ready]
[edit]- Note: The essence of the problem is that the lede fails to communicate the focus; in an encyclopedia article based on investigating an ongoing process, the focus would be the process and the lede wouldn't mention the investigation; but in a news article based on the same investigation, the focus is the investigation and therefore the lede would mention both the process and the investigation. --Pi zero (talk) 14:14, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 |
Revision 2344468 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 03:52, 26 January 2014 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
added: Then again perhaps I'm misunderstanding the focus of the article. Either way, there's a problem with the start of the article. The lede should make clear what the focus is, including that it's current. If the focus is Wikinews investigating a bunch of stuff, then the word "Wikinews" should occur somewhere in the lede. --Pi zero (talk) 03:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Revision 2344468 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 03:52, 26 January 2014 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
added: Then again perhaps I'm misunderstanding the focus of the article. Either way, there's a problem with the start of the article. The lede should make clear what the focus is, including that it's current. If the focus is Wikinews investigating a bunch of stuff, then the word "Wikinews" should occur somewhere in the lede. --Pi zero (talk) 03:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
- The review process isn't exactly hung up on this point, in the sense that source-checking can proceed whilst waiting for the lede issue to be addressed. I hope to do some source-checking later this morning. --Pi zero (talk)
- The lede paragraph, as suggested, was moved to paragraph one as it is the news event peg that illustrates the larger point. The relationship between the gallery and the Warhol program and foundation were clarified first in intro and then again in the second section. The change in the paragraphs made the first paragraphs of the second section repetitive and so those were edited for better transition. This resulted in a better flow throughout the top part of the article. Crtew (talk) 15:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Pi zero (talk) 16:00, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- The lede paragraph, as suggested, was moved to paragraph one as it is the news event peg that illustrates the larger point. The relationship between the gallery and the Warhol program and foundation were clarified first in intro and then again in the second section. The change in the paragraphs made the first paragraphs of the second section repetitive and so those were edited for better transition. This resulted in a better flow throughout the top part of the article. Crtew (talk) 15:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Review of revision 2347234 [Not ready]
[edit]| |
Revision 2347234 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 21:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Revision 2347234 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 21:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Fixed or clarified:
- The beginning date was put back into the lede so that the full dates are both together and the beginning was not just referred to as the opening on Thursday.
- Kristen Wilkins interview: User:Jkthom recorded her part of the interview and it is found on File:Kristen Wilkins on USI Warhol Exhibit 1-17-14.ogg. It was turned into me by her, and my role was to select it from the available materials and upload it. Yes, User:JustinRLaw also interviewed Wilkins but his interview was recorded on his handwritten notes.
- User:Rachristia1 conducted the interview with the Warhol Foundation and by email with the representatives of other art galleries outside of USI. She emailed her emailed interview notes. The other notes were passed on to me by her of what she was learning.
- Exhibit reporters: The media team sent to the exhibit for video were User:Miharris and User:Acphillips (not yet signed on). User: Rshipman1 was with them and conducted some of the interviews. He recorded, however, on a digital voicerecorder that doesn't allow for uploads. (Why any company would make such a device is beyond my comprehension, but it was true.) There is some overlap between Rshipman1's notes and the video team. User:Crtew was also at the exhibit and took notes on the content.
- Photography was all done by User:Snbehnke. The photo editor and layout person was User:Sskerchief. While there was cropping and minor adjustment for lighting, there was no further manipulation.
- In addition, User:Dkmarshall interviewed Katie Waters. He typed his notes out.
Not fixed, edited or clarified yet:
- Headline-lead. The article was written in Wall St. Journal Hourglass structure. What we started off with was an event that would be our news peg, which was the USI exhibit. While it is newsworthy, we wanted to attract global interest and used it to illustrate what this exhibit had in common with events like it all over the United States, which is where the program's donations comes into the picture. We return to the event at the end.
- Overview of what Wikinews did.Crtew (talk) 23:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Done I put it in first section as an overview. Crtew (talk) 01:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Remark: My specific concerns about the headline and introduction do not bear on ordering of later material. From what I understand of the hourglass form, there is no incompatibility there with what I'm asking for. If you're looking for a way to suggest the larger context in the headline... well, that's challenging. You'll need to do that without compromising the principles of keeping the headline short and capturing the focus. --Pi zero (talk) 00:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Hopper: It's very important that we change the credit format. The foundation stipulates that Warhol was the author, but that the copyright holder in case of fair use, also must be recorded, such as is common in "Courtesy of ..." credits. I did send an email with his request from the USI Art Collection. Crtew (talk) 01:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Had to take a look: What is at issue is the copyright symbol. So that symbol could go before the Warhol Foundation ... in the caption.Crtew (talk) 01:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Re image credit. Copyright information is required to appear on the image page, and it does; the "image credit" in the caption in the article is a courtesy, one we try hard not to forget, usually identifying the photographer (not necessarily the copyright holder). The problem with the image credit as it was originally on the article is that it was so long as to be disruptive... hm. I'll give it some more thought. --Pi zero (talk) 18:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Various subs-editing comments
[edit]- Comment For those who've not figured out how to get the "©" symbol, put © in as the markup for it. It is often shown superscripted, which would be <sup>©</sup>, appearing as "©". --Brian McNeil / talk 09:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, I looked in special characters without finding one.Crtew (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've had a look through the system messages, and there doesn't appear a modifiable one for the standard MediaWiki markup, but the © could be inserted into the Visual Editor list of special characters. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, I looked in special characters without finding one.Crtew (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment As-remarked in the fair use photography section, we should avoid storing/providing higher-resolution than needed.
- And it displays better as a lower res too! Thank you Crtew (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- More-so from cropping most of the broad white strips on either side of the portrait-shaped shot. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- And it displays better as a lower res too! Thank you Crtew (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Question Do the submitters believe the article could be better-presented by removing the infobox? The quantity of media in the article could-well be better-distributed, and shown as larger pictures, if space is not reserved for the infobox. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:48, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- At this point, we are going to have to scrap the infobox and chalk that up to a "learning opportunity" in the classroom! Crtew (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- That's always a judgement call. Once you're at a certain text length, or volume of media to display, infoboxes start to get in the way of presenting the article. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- At this point, we are going to have to scrap the infobox and chalk that up to a "learning opportunity" in the classroom! Crtew (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:haveyoursay
[edit]What about replacing the generic message with:
haveyoursay | "What is your opinion about Andy Warhol and his place in Art?"
Crtew (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, remember there are left and right versions. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unresolved review query
[edit]Asked in review comments but not, afaics, addressed:
- I am unclear on the provenance of the material in these two (consecutive) subsections of the reporters' notes:
I'm still unclear on this; those subsections don't verify anything for me, because I don't know where their assertions come from. --Pi zero (talk) 18:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Understood. --Pi zero (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
These were from notes submitted by User:Rachristia1. The article is for the most part based on her emails provided with the exception that I could find below. Crtew (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Running comments
[edit]- The intro says USI received large donations in 2007 and 2013. After attempting to confirm this from the provided documentation, I dug up a statement (on a page I had not been directed to) on the gallery's site syaing the first donation was in 2008, and describing a second donation as "recent"; the only indication that the second was in 2013, that I successfully located, is in one of the talk page sections whose provenance is unknown, so atm that's not useable. I'm adjusting the article text to what I've been able to confirm. (I'm aware of having tried too hard on this; it's not possible to put this much effort into everything and ever complete the review.) --Pi zero (talk) 19:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- (Heh. Can you tell I'm feeling the pressure? :-)
- I've completed source-check on the introductory and University exhibits sections. (Of course, there's always a sanity check to do at the end.) --Pi zero (talk) 20:25, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
This 20th Annniversary report from the Andy Warhol Foundation will confirm the 2007 date with its copyright and list of all universities, including USI: [2]. Wilkins did say those same dates at the Exhibit talk but the video editors cut right before that point. That's the only fact in the background that I could find that is not expressed elsewhere. Crtew (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- (The 2007 and 2008 dates for that donation may both be right, the decision in 2007 and delivery in 2008.) --Pi zero (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've lost contact with the site through which I've been accessing scoop. I'd already checked email quotes here against email quotes there, which makes it less of a disaster, but it was awfully useful to be able to look at the stuff in full context. --Pi zero (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Okay, that was understated. Without scoop I may be unable to verify, or even know how to minimal back off, some passages, forcing me to cut them entirely if I'm going to complete the review. --Pi zero (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- But we know that the information posted here are from the emails she forwarded. What would have to be deleted? I don't understand. Crtew (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- This looks to be an issue with our hosting. On to support right now. I was in wiknewsie.org around lunchtime, so is recent and has been immediately escalated to 2nd line. --Brian McNeil / talk 22:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- But we know that the information posted here are from the emails she forwarded. What would have to be deleted? I don't understand. Crtew (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've been looking at the first paragraph of Superstars. The statement that every institution got some celebrity pics, I've been entirley unable to verify (if I had access to scoop, I'd be poring over the detailed Maurer stuff; that's actually what I was working on when scoop disappeared on me). The statement that the Greensboro exhibit was built around Capote and Simon is also beyond what I see here, without the full emails, though the emails might not bear it out either. So that entire paragraph may be a complete loss without scoop, and might be in trouble even with scoop. I hadn't even tried to move on to the second paragraph of that section yet. At this point I can't cut one thing and move on to the next; I have to note the troubles I had with one thing and then move on, and make sure I come back to it later when I know more about overall how much I can and can't verify. --Pi zero (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
The above is not factually incorrect: For the overview of the program and the gifts, we should probably add this new source that I was reading. It clearly states that celebrities were a major theme gifted to the 180+ universities:
The Andy Warhol Photographic Legacy Program. "The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts 20-Year Report 1987–2007" — The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, 2007
Here's a quote from the introduction: "... in looking through the polaroids selected for the Legacy Program, it becomes clear that celebrities were not the only figures Warhol photographed with his Polaroid Big Shot, the distinct plastic camera he used for the majority of his sittings. Over half of those who sat for him were little-known or remain unidentified."
Please don't delete without checking back with me for documentation. Crtew (talk) 21:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- As I said, I'm trying to note things to come back to instead of deleting before moving on. Though of course I'm desperately hoping, with each item I check, that it's in the already-provided documentation (because it takes many times as much time and effort to determine that something isn't in the provided documentation than to determine that it is, and the effect gets much worse when the provided documentation is extensive, as here). --Pi zero (talk) 22:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, okay, I'll agree that source implies celebrity shots would have to be part of each set. And is a valid addition to Sources. --Pi zero (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- That did leave the nuance about the second sentence, which for the nonce I've tweaked in the article text. --Pi zero (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- I'm ok with "including". Crtew (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- That did leave the nuance about the second sentence, which for the nonce I've tweaked in the article text. --Pi zero (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, okay, I'll agree that source implies celebrity shots would have to be part of each set. And is a valid addition to Sources. --Pi zero (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Example of a sort-of trivium: The last sentence of Superstars isn't verified by the quote on the page here. It'd be trivially easy to check the email... if I had access to the email atm. It doesn't escape my attention that, in the end, that sentence would drop out without a ripple (though there's no rush; so far it's still possible that I won't finish this review before I'm forced to stop for the night). --Pi zero (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Settled. --Pi zero (talk) 23:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've got scoop again. --Pi zero (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- I cannot verify about half the names (in Superstars) of people whose pictures are in the exhibit. Some of them happen to be on the gallery's Warhol Collection page; but a bunch of them are not, including the local person whose pressence is the whole justification for a paragraph. Note, on that latter paragraph, I also can't find verification that they deliberately seeded the collections with locally relevant people; without a statement of intent from the foundation (which I haven't found) it seems like speculation based on an observed particular case. [attn: Crtew] --Pi zero (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Argh. I'd missed it. 'Fraid I'm having trouble keeping track of all the pieces of this. Thanks. --Pi zero (talk) 00:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- I'm sure I put this in the plan above. I know it's a lot of materials. Crtew (talk) 00:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Argh. I'd missed it. 'Fraid I'm having trouble keeping track of all the pieces of this. Thanks. --Pi zero (talk) 00:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- You did. Usually I start by going through all the source material, shading parts of the article as I find them, and that probably would have caught this; but source-to-article is difficult for very long articles, and will never reliably determine that something in the article isn't sourced, so for some of this I've been going article-to-source, which didn't catch the subjects list.
- @Crtew, I'm still not seeing support for the assertion that the foundation selects photos of local significance. I'm reminded of the probability and statistics problem about how large a random group of people has to be for a greater than 50% chance of two having the same birthday (a startlingly small group). I do note that sentence would drop out cleanly, leaving a perfectly respectable one-sentence paragraph about Halston. --Pi zero (talk) 01:12, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- I'm doubtful of the date on the Annie Oakley; not the sort of detail that's robust against misremembering if not carefully documented. --Pi zero (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Ok, that's my fault, I put the silk screens on the second page but I decided to use it when Wilkins mentioned it in the video. It is correct. Crtew (talk) 03:44, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- As I approach the home stretch, admittedly I'm being slightly more willing to prune little stuff that I didn't find. Such as a bit of indirect-quote from Wilkins that I didn't find either in any of the three places I recalled where stuff is said by Wilkins. --Pi zero (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't see where the passage "but then her instructor gave her class an assignment to attend the exhibit" comes from. The reporter's notes don't suggest it to me. --Pi zero (talk) 02:24, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Okay. I've now been through everything once, and at the point of trying to list all remaining issues. Then question is then what it would take to simply eliminate the problems and publish, versus the benefits of waiting for feedback... but that doesn't come up until the list exists. So, let's see.
- Didn't successfully verify "The Andy Warhol Legacy Program selects some Polaroids for its donation packages of models who have some connection to that community."
- Didn't successfully verify "but then her instructor gave her class an assignment to attend the exhibit."
- Ok this is a learning point for our class. We have to speak about how to better document these stories and the completeness of notes. I altered/sanitized it. Crtew (talk) 03:41, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- An alternative question for Haveyoursay has been suggested. (As I've reviewed this, all day today, I deliberately didn't put the {{under review}} tag on it so that others wouldn't feel constrained from such things, but no action was taken on this.)
- I'll want to take one last look at the question of image credit on the Hopper pic. I believe we're fine as is (the gallery put a bunch of these up on their web site with no words at all until one clicks on one for a larger image), but still, worth one last look.
- --Pi zero (talk) 02:59, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, one other item worth mentioning.
- I never used the Time source for anything. Not sure why it's there.
- --Pi zero (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- It was a reference for some information for a transition that somehow got left out. There was a list of other photographers who used Polaroid. Now in the article, search for sentence: The Polaroid format is not what made Warhol famous.... Crtew (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Tried something with HYS, and think we're fine on the image credit. --Pi zero (talk) 03:27, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- It was a reference for some information for a transition that somehow got left out. There was a list of other photographers who used Polaroid. Now in the article, search for sentence: The Polaroid format is not what made Warhol famous.... Crtew (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Review of revision 2350598 [Passed]
[edit]  |
Revision 2350598 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 03:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 2350598 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 03:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
- Verification provided for the 1987 date, so restored. --Pi zero (talk) 04:11, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Certainly.....
[edit]...in the running for the most massive collaboration to-date here ever!! I certainly sense an FA nomination down the line somewhere! However, "Wikinews provides additional video, audio and photographs so our readers may learn more." right dead in the center of a new article smelled kind of odd. --Bddpaux (talk) 16:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
- I think the main collaborative piece from Crtew's last class involved as-much collaborative work, although less OR was involved. The Anonymous vs Scientology article was definitely more-collaborative, although the sourcing/note requirements were less-stringent at the time. And, again predating peer-review, there was our in-depth synthesis on the Indian Ocean tsunami.
- As volunteers, I don't think we're likely to coordinate as-well as an undergraduate class should be able to. Geographic dispersion, and divergent viewpoints, limit what we'd agree on the import of to undertake similar scope of work. I really want to see more universities working with Wikinews, and perhaps a few doing their PhD on how we function as a user-vetted news publisher. Doing so would require working to obtain reviewer rights, and accreditation. We know the review timescales would draw flak in such a study, but when-compared to even the BBC I'd expect a lower word/typo plus grammatical error score.
- NPOV has driven a fair proportion of our policy development; more-so than the BBC's "balance" or Fox's fictional "Fair and Balanced". It is 'best effort' towards an ideal, which means it will always be best-effort to a point we're comfortable arguing is the best can be done. As it stands, I don't think quantitative analysis of our content is valid; qualitative, yes; but that requires a solid argument on the project's quality. --Brian McNeil / talk 17:12, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Correction
[edit]Change Rshipman1 (Wikinewsie) to Rfshipman1 (Wikinewsie)
- Done --Pi zero (talk) 02:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Change User:Dkmarshall (Wikinewsie) to Dkmarshall (Wikinewsie)
- These are identical. --Pi zero (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
- Ah. Now I get it. (Duh).
- Done --Pi zero (talk) 02:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)