- 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 Yoninah (talk) 00:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Puer mingens
Cupid urinating on Venus
- * ... that the urine emitted from a prepubescent boy's penis (pictured) symbolically represented semen in Renaissance artwork? Source: Simons, Patricia. Manliness and the Visual Semiotics of Bodily Fluids in Early Modern Culture. Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 2009
- ALT1:... that images of boys urinating were symbols of fertility in Renaissance artwork? Source: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c47e/34f78dde79c32d2cc62256a0acf08710cf33.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imperium Sine Fine (talk • contribs) 07:45, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
- ALT2:... that depictions of urinating boys in Renaissance artwork could alternatively represent boyish innocence or erotic virility? Source: https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/a-secret-history-of-the-pissing-figure-in-art Imperium Sine Fine 08:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imperium Sine Fine (talk • contribs)
- Reviewed: As I have less than 5 DYK's, I am opting not to review.
Created by Imperium Sine Fine (talk). Self-nominated at 00:54, 5 February 2020 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
@Imperium Sine Fine: nice short article about an interesting subject. The article complies with all the requirements for DYK, but there are still two paragraphs missing at least a citation. Moreover, I don't think that pisicare is an Italian word: where is the source? About the hooks, I find all three interesting. No QPQ needed. Alex2006 (talk) 08:17, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Alessandro57: Thanks for your review. I've gone back and added some more citations. You were right about pisicare; it was a typo and I've replaced it with the correct verb + citation.
Very good @Imperium Sine Fine:, good to go! Alex2006 (talk) 09:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I came by to promote this, but I'm not seeing the connection between the symbolism and Renaissance artwork in the article. The description of this technique in Renaissance art is one line long. Yoninah (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: I'm not sure I understand your comment. The Etymology and word play section goes on for multiple lines, both describing the symbolism of the technique and mentioning Renaissance artists like Michaelangelo and Lorenzo Lotto who utilized this technique in their work; the article also contains images of this technique in Renaissance art in multiple media. Could you clarify? Imperium Sine Fine 07:35, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
- I was actually looking to verify ALT1. I see a reference to the symbolism of fertility sourced to a journal of medieval and early modern studies. Does that include the Renaissance? Then I look under the specific section "Revival of the puer mingens in the Renaissance" and see almost nothing written there. It's true that DYK articles can be "start-class", but if every one of your hooks is mentioning the Renaissance, IMO more should be explicitly said about the Renaissance in your article. Yoninah (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, Yes, the journal of medieval and early modern studies reference includes the Renaissance; the journal article's content is primarily on the puer mingens in the Renaissance, as are a couple other journals referenced in the article. From what I've read, the puer mingens has some antecedents in antiquity, such as on some Roman sarcophagi, but then didn't recur that much until the Renaissance when it became suddenly became very popular. So while it's not a uniquely Renaissance phenomenon, that era was the heyday, as it were, for the puer mingens and that's why I mentioned the Renaissance in my hooks. I viewed the whole article as implicitly being about the Renaissance just because that's when the motif became so widespread. But I included the section "Revival of the puer mingens in the Renaissance" just to clarify that it was not originally created during the Renaissance--the puer mingens was revived in art at that time and then ballooned in popularity from there. Does that make sense, or do you still think I should, maybe, throw in a line at the start of the article about it becoming most widespread once the Renaissance started? Imperium Sine Fine 08:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
