Talk:Archimedean Excogitation
Latest comment: 3 years ago by SL93 in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Archimedean Excogitation appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 April 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
edit- 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) 03:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
( )
.jpg)
Archimedean Excogitation
... that the rolling ball sculpture Archimedean Excogitation (pictured) is 27 feet (8.2 m) tall and has a system of nine tracks with almost 30 moving or sound-producing components? Source: Height, tracks, component count
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tobias Watkins
- Comment: I wish I had a precise count of the components, but that doesn't seem to be publicly available.
Created by Sdkb (talk). Self-nominated at 19:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC).
What a lovely burst of nostalgia – I recall this machine from my younger years. The article is new, just long enough, and free from prose issues. (I would, however, add a link to wikt:excogitation to explain the contraption's name.) The hook is within guidelines, but not very punchy. I would recommend focusing solely on the number of moving/auditory components, or perhaps on its use of obscure duckpin bowling balls.
- Side note: As a recent artwork, the images are a complex copyright situation. Because it was created in the 1978–89 time frame, either a copyright notice (such as on the explanatory plaque) or a formal registration would place the artwork (and, because the US has no freedom of panorama for artworks, the photos as well) under copyright. I can't find evidence of formal registration here, nor any indication of a copyright notice as the machine itself, so the image should be fine. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Pi.1415926535, and happy special day! Yes, it's a nostalgia item for me too haha. Wiktionary link added; good idea. For the hook, would this streamlined version be better?
- ALT1 ... that the rolling ball sculpture Archimedean Excogitation (pictured) has almost 30 moving or sound-producing components?
- For the image, thanks for doing that check. The possibility of difficulties occurred to me, but it looks like George Rhoads himself uploaded the picture back in 2014, so we should be in the clear. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Good to go with ALT1, and good point about the photos! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:29, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Pi.1415926535, and happy special day! Yes, it's a nostalgia item for me too haha. Wiktionary link added; good idea. For the hook, would this streamlined version be better?
- Side note: As a recent artwork, the images are a complex copyright situation. Because it was created in the 1978–89 time frame, either a copyright notice (such as on the explanatory plaque) or a formal registration would place the artwork (and, because the US has no freedom of panorama for artworks, the photos as well) under copyright. I can't find evidence of formal registration here, nor any indication of a copyright notice as the machine itself, so the image should be fine. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
