Talk:The Quest (Portland, Oregon)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I look forward to reviewing this article. I'll begin with some initial comments sometime within the next 24-36 hours after a few readings and confirming some of the citations, etc. Thanks! --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for offering to review this article. Take your time, ColonelHenry -- I know the Hart Lake article took some time to review. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hart Lake did take a little time, but now that it's promoted, I'll be taking care of this one in the next day or two.--ColonelHenry (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Non-reviewer comment: File:The Quest sculpture, Portland, Oregon 1.jpg despicts the picture of a copyrighted sculpture located in the US. As such, it can't be uploaded to Commons, but to Wikipedia under a fair use license (Non-free 3D art). For the license of the picture itself, CC-BY-SA-3.0 still applying. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 18:02, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * So, I am not sure how to best address this problem. Do I just request that the files be deleted at Commons? This was a concern of mine from the start, but I never received a response to my comments on the article's talk page., do you have a suggestion? -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I tagged it for automatic transfer per commons:User:Commons fair use upload bot. If you have other questions, ask on my talk page so this doesn't hijack the GA discussion. czar  ♔  19:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your help in fixing that, czar ♔ .--ColonelHenry (talk) 19:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * Description
 * designed by Count Alexander von Svoboda, an Austria-born, Toronto-based sculptor...did he carve it, or just draw it on paper and subcontract the work out? The use of the word "design", his being based in Toronto, it being carved in Italy...say it with definitive certainty.
 * The article body mentions 35 stonemasons. Are you suggesting that these details should be mentioned in the lead? -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * "in front of the Standard"...in front of is rather vague as several sides of a building can be "in front of"...do you mean in front of the building's entrance? is this front located between the building and the street or is it in an alleyway off the sidewalk?
 * I am not sure I can get any more specific than "in front of the Standard Insurance Center... at Southwest 5th Avenue and Southwest Taylor Street in downtown Portland". It would be original research (imo) if I said something like "in front of the main entrance", unless a source says so, but I think from the picture you can assume the sculpture is in front of the main entrance. I went with what the sources said. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * "It was commissioned by Georgia-Pacific in 1967 and installed in front of the Standard Insurance Center (formerly known as the Georgia-Pacific Building)"...was it intended to be in front of their headquarters, when did they move out, when did Standard move in, did ownership of the statue transfer from GP to SI? How did SI acquire the work? (is the sculpture considered part of the building property?)
 * Sources made no mention of ownership transfer. SI does not own the work, they just surveyed the work. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Why did Georgia-Pacific commission the work? Why did they choose von Svoboda? (contest?, direct commission?)
 * No idea. Sources did not say. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * "Rose Festival princesses presented the work at a formal ceremony" - why? what made them special enough to do so? was it unveiled during the rose festival? when was the ceremony?
 * Rose Festival princess do these sorts of civic formalities and ceremonies. I don't think it's really about them being "special enough". I think 1970 is specific enough, but people can click on the Rose Festival link to learn more about the annual summer festival or see that the article was published in July. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * How does Michaelangelo inspire the work?
 * I don't know, I've never met Count Alexander von Svoboda... but a source said Michaelangelo inspired the work! :) -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * In 2002, Sallie Tisdale of the The Oregonian...what's her authority to speak on it? (which I stated earlier in my comments below)
 * She is a writer for The Oregonian? Is it our duty to question the qualifications of reporters for major news publications? Added "journalist". -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Reception
 * Tisdale -- explain her significance...."Journalist Sallie Tisdale..."? Just referring to her by surname divorces her from her authority on the subject but gives that false air of expertise. Establish her authority to make her comment relevant...man on the street interviewee, journalist, art critic...since everyone has an opinion. Why is her opinion special?
 * Added "journalist". -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I'm missing this...what's the image I'm supposed to get from "Saturday Night at the Y"? It's context and meaning as an insult or critique is rather lost on me. Is it a nickname that implies the YMCA is a den of promiscuity?
 * Actually, I am really glad you asked this. I assumed the same thing, but I did not find a source with an explanation. Actually, if I Google "Saturday Night at the Y"+"von Svoboda", I really get just the Smithsonian link. I think this is worth including in the article, given it is the Smithsonian Institution (and other sources mention the nickname as well), but I do wish an explanation was provided. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * "One writer for The Seattle Times referenced the latter nickname while providing examples of differences between Portland and Seattle"....elaborate...what differences referring to the sculpture did this article state. Just stating that the article said something without explaining that something tells me nothing.
 * Great criticism. I changed the sentence to read: "One writer for The Seattle Times, in a piece about differences between Portland and Seattle, referenced the latter nickname as an example of Portland's "kitschier" art." Thanks. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * "The sculpture has been included in at least one published walking tour of Portland"...this reads like indiscriminate trivia (See: WP:MISC/WP:INDISCRIMINATE/WP:HTRIVIA) unless there's a reason this is significant.
 * Hmm. To start, I combined the sentence with the above paragraph so that it does not stand out. I don't think it is trivial, but if you disagree I wonder if the sentence can be re-worded somehow. I think it is relevant to the subject that it has been included in a walking tour of the city. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

More to come...--ColonelHenry (talk) 12:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "should purchase Fugitives and Refugees: A Walk in Portland, Oregon, a recently published travelogue by Chuck Palahniuk, if they were unfamiliar with "Three Groins in the Fountain".[9]" Elaborate...what does Palahniuk say that he's being referred to?  Otherwise stating that someone else said "hey, read Palahniuk" doesn't reveal anything (a) about the interpretation/reception of the sculpture or (b) what Palahniuk wrote.
 * This particular source only says: "Can you define Three Groins in the Fountain, Big Pink, Jail-Blazers, Trendy-Third Ave., or Trustafarians? If not, you'll need this how-to-do Portland on a slow weekend manual..." To me, this implies that Palahniuk discusses the sculpture in his book, referring to it by its nickname. You raise a good point: I should investigate further. I have Fugitives & Refugees on hold at the library (it seems like a book I would enjoy anyway). I am happy to see how the sculpture is mentioned in the book. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * When you do get the book, incorporate it--it's likely a valuable and hilarious source and would make this article stand out in the dry world of art. Palahniuk is fun. If you get the chance, meet him in person and hear him at public reading--being in Portland you have more opportunities to experience that. I think he lives near there.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. Noted! I've already read quite a bit of the book, even though I just picked it up today, but so far I can only find his "definition" of the sculpture as part of a vocabulary lesson. The work is listed among several pages of locals words and their meanings. He says the following of "Three Groins...": "a nickname for the statue Quest by Count Alexander von Svoboda on the west side of the Standard Insurance Center, at SW Fifth Avenue and Salmon Street." Nothing new to add to the article, really. Should I add this page as a reference though, most likely following the sentence about Palahniuk? -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:08, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * See this update to the article. Let me know if you can think of a better way to incorporate the book into the article. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:18, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your work thus far. I believe I have at least responded to all of your comments, so please let me know if any of your concerns have not been addressed. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look a little later (work, travelling later).--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

New reviewer
Henry's asked to withdraw from this review, so I'll be taking it over. Sorry for the inconvenience and delay, and thanks in advance for your work on this one! Comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, this looks excellent to me on first pass, and I think the concerns above have all been sufficiently addressed. Let me go through the checklist again but my guess is that this is ready for promotion. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * http://www.healthheritageresearch.com/alexvonsvoboda/Connaught/AvS-SPCmosaic.html seems questionable as a reliable source; am I understanding right that it's a self-published website? -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Possibly, but here I only use HHR as the platform that hosts other articles. I included the original article's details in the citation, along with HHR as the host. I am not using any information that is the opinion of, or info presented only by, HHR. Please let me know if this is still problematic, or if I need to adjust how the citation presents the source. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hm. Thinking about this some more, we probably can't link here, because the author's posting of newspaper articles without some kind of copyright permission notice is likely to be a copyright violation. Do the articles you cite from this page have enough information to cite them directly? Since this guy seems to be a professional researcher, I have no problem accepting that he's transcribed the articles from their websites correctly, but I think we do need to remove this link and cite the sources he gathers individually. Does that sound do-able? -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you take a look at what I did to the reference? I made the article the main part of the citation, with the link included as a note accompanying the citation. If this is still problematic, and you believe the link should be moved completely, I can do that. I just figured having a verifiable, accessible version of the article might be helpful to readers. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand why you want to have it in, but unfortunately, it still doesn't work per WP:LINKVIO: "if you know or reasonably suspect that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. An example would be linking to a site hosting the lyrics of many popular songs without permission from their copyright holders. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States (Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry [1])." -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Done. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking over this review. Happy to address any other concerns you may have. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)