Template:Did you know nominations/Robert Sexé

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The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Meanderingbartender (talk) 03:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Robert Sexé edit

(

)

[[File:|120x133px|Drawing of Robert Sexé in Moscow ]]

Drawing of Robert Sexé in Moscow

... that Robert Sexé travels and exploits around the world are considered to be an inspiration for the comic character Tintin? Source:Tintin and the figure of mysterious inspiration

Created by Meanderingbartender (talk). Self-nominated at 07:09, 16 March 2018 (UTC).

Promising, but needs some citations - in the last paragraph (date and place of death) and in the "Around the World Trips" section. The references also need fixing - the titles are missing from some, and the publications from others. Neutrality^talk 22:16, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank kindly for your review. I think I got everything. Let me know if anything else needs to be fixed. Meanderingbartender (talk) 23:42, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Can we get one for the Route 66 sentence? Thanks! Neutrality^talk 01:40, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Route 66 came from fr.wikipedia. Thought I had another reference that confirmed it but apparently do not. I removed it. Meanderingbartender (talk) 02:01, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks good. Giving this a

. Neutrality^talk 02:05, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I came by to promote this, but I do not see an inline cite for the connection between him and Tintin. You have three citations after a sentence in the lead about him being a reporter; these are completely unnecessary and should be moved to the main body of the article. (In general, noncontroversial statements in the lead do not need to be sourced.) Meanwhile, if this is one of his claims to notability, more should be said about him being an inspiration for Tintin in the body of the article, citing the refs you have. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:45, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Added a bit more about Tintin with a new section. Thank you kindly. Meanderingbartender (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, that's much better. Restoring tick per Neutrality's review. Yoninah (talk) 20:44, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Wait a minute. Is the illustration really freely licensed? The uploader claims it's his "own work", but then there's something about a scanner at the bottom of the Commons page. Yoninah (talk) 20:49, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: I'm fairly certain it was the artist, Christophe Fauret, who uploaded it. The initial fr.wikpedia page was done by the author of the biography of Sexé who used drawings by Fauret. His website. While I do like the drawing, I'm happy for it to be delinked from the DYK. Meanderingbartender (talk) 21:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

No, it's a great image, and I would like to use it for DYK. I just need to be absolutely sure it's freely licensed. If not, it needs to be removed from the article as well. Calling on @The Rambling Man: for help here. Yoninah (talk) 21:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. It's certainly entirely not the uploader's "own work", just take a look at this to find the original. It looks like an arty filter applied to someone else's photo, in which case I'd ditch it because the attribution is not sufficient. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

There is this image of a book cover[1] coming from the author of the biography. [2] The artist wanted to portray Sexé in the style of Herge/Tintin. I don't see why somebody would go through the trouble of redrawing a photo where they could just upload the original photo. Meanderingbartender (talk) 21:35, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Re-pinging @The Rambling Man:. Yoninah (talk) 22:39, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

So, for clarification, does the person that uploaded the image own it in entirety? As this is clearly a derivative work, I'd expect to see all that kind of information on the Commons page, and last time I look, no such attribution and explanation existed there. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:58, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

@Meanderingbartender: Any updates? Also, @Yoninah: what do you think about this running without the image? Since right now the image appears to be problematic. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:28, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: It could run without the image, but if the image is problematic, it needs to be removed from the article altogether. I pinged the nominator on his/her talk page and am still waiting for confirmation that the image is properly licensed and attributed. Yoninah (talk) 09:42, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5 and Yoninah: As far as I'm concerned the image is licensed. There's no dispute on the commons page. Fail this nomination if you want but don't bully me into doing something I completely disagree with. Meanderingbartender (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Considering the issue with the image, would it be best for this to simply run without it? Seems that the article has no other issues otherwise. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 21:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

As I wrote above, if the image is improperly licensed, it must be removed from the article before it appears on the main page. I pinged The Rambling Man to explain the situation, and he did. As I'm not so up on image licensing, I can't help much here. I know that User:Stefan2 is an active editor in non-free licensing; perhaps he can help here. Yoninah (talk) 23:15, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

The image seems to have been used as a book cover in 1996 (with a photographic background).[3] Do we have any evidence that the uploader is the artist? WP:IOWN describes what we normally require.

There is also the question of the copyright status of the underlying photo. Commons needs to comply with both French and United States copyright law, while English Wikipedia only cares about the United States copyright law.

According to [4], En 1928, Sexé fait un tour d'Europe, puis il met le cap au Nord, et pousse jusqu'au Cercle Arctique. l'année suivante, il "refait" l'Europe, mais en zigzags cette fois. In other words, he travelled through Europe in 1928 and 1929, so the photo was probably taken during one of those years. Was the photo published before the book was published in 1996? If that's not the case, the photo is still copyrighted in both France (copyright term: 70 years from publication) and the United States (copyright term: 120 years from creation), provided that the photographer is anonymous. If the photo was published earlier, then it could be in the public domain. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree that this image shouldn't be run. If it's a derivative work, it's not free, and if it's not a derivative work, it can't be considered based in an RS. Remove the image, and this hook should be okay. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I have nominated the image for deletion at Commons. Yoninah (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm not going to waste a single more second on this nomination based on the bullying behaviour of several people. Fail this and be done with you all. Meanderingbartender (talk) 07:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Meanderingbartender: I'm sorry, I cannot accept your withdrawal. This is a fine article and worthy of main page exposure. The rules of free-licensing are just really strict; I've had limited experience with it before on behalf of another editor, and I can see it's not pretty. As writers, we're familiar with the intense scrutiny of verifiable sources; this is just the flip side in pictures. It's not my intention to bully you at all. After the image is removed from Commons, this will be ready to go. Yoninah (talk) 10:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)