Template:Did you know nominations/Martha Burgess

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 RoySmith talk 15:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Martha Burgess

Moved to mainspace by Miraclepine (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 79 past nominations.

ミラP@Miraclepine 02:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - This definitely can't run in wikivoice. Perhaps "that to an LGTB historian, the vandalism of Martha Burgess's lesbian sculpture was "indicative of how contentious gay-straight relations remained on Staten Island in the 1990s"?". Another option is "to Gale Harris", but that doesn't explain who that is or why we should care and they don't appear to have an article. Those barely squeak by under the character limit, so you could go with something else altogether, maybe "...that Martha Burgess's 1993 sculpture of two female World War II personnel kissing was inspired by the V-J Day in Times Square photograph?"?
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Miraclepine: Not relevant to DYK, but "having lived in the state since 1984" makes it sound like Manhattan is a state. Rusalkii (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

  • @Rusalkii: I actually considered ALT2 but wasn't sure it was hooky; but now that you brought it up, I'm fine with that so added. I've also added ALT0B and ALT1B to use "deemed" because it clarifies it's opinion while shorter than "to an LGTB historian" or "to Gale Harris". Also when using the checklist, please mark the "status" as "?" if there's a minor issue. ミラP@Miraclepine 21:57, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
Happy to accept either of the ALTXBs, I think for ALT2 it would need another reviewer since I suggested it. Marking as reviewed but if you prefer ALT2 you should probably add the second opinion symbol. Rusalkii (talk) 22:04, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
@Rusalkii: Yes, ALT2 needs another reviewer per WP:DYKRR and I prefer ALT0B/ALT1B over ALT2. ミラP@Miraclepine 02:56, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
I'm not formally objecting, but making a note as I just passed on promoting this. Both ALTXBs felt overly verbose, and upon checking the cited source, it says, "that the work was vandalized and had to be withdrawn from exhibition" which is actually still a bit more complicated as there is a plausible reading that withdrawing in response to vandalism is also part of how this incident is "indicative of how contentious gay-straight relations remained". Regarding ALT2, most Americans will be visually familiar with the photo, but not with "V-J Day in Times Square". Rjjiii (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
Approve ALT2. Suggesting slight tweak in light of comments above
This way it sounds less like the reader is presumed to recognize the photo by its title. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:13, 27 April 2025 (UTC)