Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Stephan Vanfleteren

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 00:15, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Stephan Vanfleteren

(
)
  • ... that the photographer Stephan Vanfleteren crossed the US while modelling as Presley and being photographed by Elvis? Source 1: "two European photojournalists, Robert Huber from Switzerland and Stephan Vanfleteren from Belgium, decided to trace the King's footsteps, kitted out in identical white jumpsuits, mirror shades and high-rise hair. [...] The pair diligently photograph themselves in the ordinary situations in which Presley would never have been seen [...] Both Huber, who took the colour shots, and Vanfleteren, who works in black and white, have a fine eye for ironic composition." (Alfred Hickling, "Elvis and Presley", The Guardian, 12 December 2001. Incidentally, this Guardian article talks of "a month-long odyssey from Times Square to the Nevada desert". But they went beyond Nevada, into California; as widely stated for example here [World Press Photo], as well as in "Source 2".) Source 2: "Huber is Elvis in the black and white photos; Vanfleteren is Presley in the colour photographs." ("Elvis&Presley", Comune di Verona, 2001.)
    • ALT1:... that the photographer Stephan Vanfleteren crossed the US while modelling as Presley and being photographed by a friend modelling as Elvis? Sources: as above.
    • ALT2:... that the photographer Stephan Vanfleteren crossed the US while modelling as Presley and photographing a friend modelling as Elvis? Sources: as above.
  • Reviewed: Solow Building
  • Comment: (i) The article is loosely based on the one in fr:Wikipedia. (ii) The first hook above ("ALT0"?) isn't strictly true; the second is, but I think it's leaden. (iii) The article has a photo of the article subject, but I don't recommend it for DYK as it wouldn't look good if miniaturized.

Created by Hoary (talk). Self-nominated at 11:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC).

  • More comments by (self-) nominator: First, I'll revise (ii) above, to (ii′): The first hook above ("ALT0"?) isn't strictly true; ALT1 is strictly true, but it's dull. So I retract my suggestion of either ALT0 or ALT1. Secondly, ALT2 contains both "US" and "modelling": I hope that this goes without saying, but I have no allegiance to this or that orthography; feel free to use "U.S." and "modeling". -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: ALT2 seems best. ili (talk) 05:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

  • I have problems with the neutrality of this article. There are sentences in this article that seem like they're either unquoted, translated reviews, in which case they should quoted and attributed inline, or they're straight up WP:PUFFERY. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:31, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
  • That's a fair cop, theleekycauldron. Actually a milder version of your objection had been gnawing at me even before you expressed it. I hope that this edit, which I made just a couple of minutes ago, has done the job. -- Hoary (talk) (nominator), 23:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
  • @Hoary: I appreciate your being willing to work with it :) Your edit is definitely a great start, but I have some other questions:
  1. In this role, he covered, in black and white, its big stories of the 1990s — any indication that these were the big stories from its source?
  2. Is it necessary to add every journal he contributed to? It could just be "several other publications, including..."
  3. The final paragraph in the "career" section is going to need a non-primary source
  4. After rushing around the world for press photography, Vanfleteren has said, he slowed down, looking for calm, deliberation and depth. is this a direct or translated quote?
  5. The results are detailed; the faces are worn and austere. He photographs people very close up, strongly emphasizing their features and giving an impression of intimacy. Is this a directly quoted review? If so, it should be attributed and within quotes.
  6. Vanfleteren photographed ordinary people far from the major centres: timeless, melancholy and strangely distant images, of dignified faces. The book accompanying the exhibition invites the reader to travel across the nation in search of an elusive identity. quoted review?
  7. which painted a subjective picture of Belgium from a social point of view I'd change "painted a subjective picture of" to "sought to portray"—it grounds the language a little bit.
  8. uncanny landscapes quoted?
  9. The exhibition and accompanying book demonstrate a great affection for the city and, in particular for those of its inhabitants least favoured by life quoted?
Feel free to dispute any of these if you think I'm being unfair, and I'm here to answer any questions you might have. added at 00:23, 5 September 2021 by Theleekycauldron
Thank you for the scrutiny, Theleekycauldron. No, not unfair
  1. I was certain that the claim that these were the major stories of the time was explicitly made in the cited source. But it turns out not to be. Removed.
  2. No, not necessary. I removed mention of those that don't (yet) have articles in en:WP.
  3. The cited source was this, which reads "Cofondateur des Éditions Kannibaal/Hannibal, il en est le directeur artistique. Depuis 2010, il est professeur invité de l’Académie des beaux-arts à Gand (KASK)." I've just realized that there's also an English version, which reads "Co-founder of Kannibaal/Hannibal Publishing, he is the company’s artistic director. Since 2010, he has been guest professor at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Ghent (KASK)." (I've changed the reference.) Whether in French or in English, this is on the website of what rather grandly calls itself Le Musée de la Photographie, Centre d'art contemporain de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles à Charleroi: a name I think it deserves (as do other editors: it has articles, or at least stubs, in the languages of five Wikipedias, none of them English, whose Wikipedia can be somewhat parochial). It is a non-primary source, and I think a solid one.
  4. It's a translated quote. But I realize, to my shame, that it's translated directly from fr:Stephan Vanfleteren and that I lazily attributed the entire paragraph to the two sources that it's attributed to there without checking to see if the material actually is in either source. It is not. I've therefore deleted it from the article.
  5. It's not a quotation; it is, perhaps too loosely, derived from De laatste jaren worden Vanfleterens beelden dan weer erg confronterend. De fotograaf zit zo goed als op zijn onderwerp en door de keuze voor een keiharde afwerking ontstaan bijna karikaturen, dodenmaskers van levenden. Harde schaduwen, ogen die wegvallen, diepgegroefde gezichten, nauwelijks heldere grijswaarden (source). I've trimmed "and giving an impression of intimacy", which overstepped.
  6. Uh, more lazy translation from the French, which cites a source that doesn't mention the book. I've trimmed accordingly. As for the rest, it seems to me a reasonable distillation of the cited source, which says, inter alia: Wie kaum ein anderer hat er das Land bei seinen unzähligen Reisen in die Provinz kennengelernt. Er sucht das Besondere im Alltäglichen und dabei ist er in fast jedem Winkel des kleinen Landes fündig geworden. [...] Seine Arbeiten wirken zeitlos, oft melancholisch und seltsam entrückt. Nicht die Hauptstadt Brüssel und ihre weltstädtische Pracht sind sein Thema, sondern die kleinen Welten der einfachen Leute auf dem Land. Sie interessieren ihn in ihrer zeitlosen Beharrlichkeit. [...] Für Vanfleteren ist das Projekt „eine Reise durch ein vernarbtes Land, das in der Suche nach einer unauffindbaren Identität gefangen ist, aber mit der melancholischen Seele einer 177 Jahre alten Nation“ ausgestattet ist. Now, the source is a commercial gallery (see this) that presumably hoped to sell Vanfleteren's prints and to profit from this; it's certainly not optimal for our purposes. If we're feeling grumpy, we can call the cited source promotional. However, I think a minor dependence on material such as this is tolerable. Of course, you may disagree.
  7. Done.
  8. How about "darkly beautiful"?
  9. The cited source says Datzelfde jaar vroeg het Musée de la Photographie te Charleroi Vanfleteren om 'photographe de résidence' te worden. Hij raakte volledig in de ban van de door werkloosheid en criminaliteit geteisterde stad. Het uit de opdracht resulterende fotoboek, een hoogtepunt in zijn oeuvre, kan gezien worden als een soort liefdesverklaring – met name richting de bewoners die het minder goed getroffen hebben in het leven. Isn't this good enough? (Incidentally, I'm in a mood to add Le photographe amoureux de cette ville monte au sommet d’un terril pour embrasser le crépuscule et former le vœu que le noir de la nuit porte la promesse d'un blanc matin [source] somewhere, but my mind's too fuzzy to do so right now.)
Content first posted in stages from 01:04 to 08:28, 5 September; reformatted Hoary (talk) 11:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
I hope that my responses are adequate, Theleekycauldron. Where they are not, don't hesitate to let me know. -- Hoary (talk) 08:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hoary: I appreciate the gentle nudge; sorry I haven't gotten back to you sooner. I'll hopefully get back to you tomorrow :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:49, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
  • @Hoary: All righty, I'm back.
  • 1–4, 7, and 8 are cleared.
  • re 5 and 9, I'd prefer that even these loose translations were attributed inline to their sources, if not quoted.
  • re 6: I would prefer if the section found less promotional sources to rest on—the whole paragraph kind of relies on it. But if you were to attribute inline, I'd take it.
Hereby pinging you, Theleekycauldron. With an edit a few minutes ago, I addressed all the issues, or at least attempted to do so. Do take a look. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hoary: Oh my! Above and beyond what I was expecting—nice work! All of my objections are hereby fulfilled. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 03:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Probably irrelevant to DYK, theleekycauldron, but do you have any comment on the formatting of what are currently notes [not references] 2, 3 and 4 (similar to each other) and 12 (very dissimilar)? (I do notice that this specifies italics, so I'm about to make that change.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hoary: Good question—unfortunately, I don't know enough about that, you'd have to ask someone else. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Hmm, I think I'll leave the contrast as is, theleekycauldron. If somebody wants to change it, they can. (I could search for authoritative guidance on the matter, but I'm pretty sure I'd doze off before finding it.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Stephan_Vanfleteren&oldid=1044959254"