Talk:Surrealism

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Surrealism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090823075755/http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/Slavonic/Absurd.htm to http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/Slavonic/Absurd.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080906153307/http://www.holycross.edu/departments/theatre/eisser/semiotics.html to http://www.holycross.edu/departments/theatre/eisser/semiotics.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120918070327/http://www.cnac-gp.fr/education/ressources/ENS-Surrealistart-EN/ENS-Surrealistart-EN.htm to http://www.cnac-gp.fr/education/ressources/ENS-Surrealistart-EN/ENS-Surrealistart-EN.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150319041151/http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/2593?tmpl=component&print=1 to http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/2593?tmpl=component&print=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160207230811/https://pers-www.wlv.ac.uk/~fa1871/whatsurr.html to http://pers-www.wlv.ac.uk/~fa1871/whatsurr.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120918070327/http://www.cnac-gp.fr/education/ressources/ENS-Surrealistart-EN/ENS-Surrealistart-EN.htm to http://www.cnac-gp.fr/education/ressources/ENS-Surrealistart-EN/ENS-Surrealistart-EN.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:53, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Seems to me that there is some synthesis or original research creeping into the article.  Consider this from the Expansion section:
Whose "pairing"? Who is dividing Dada and Surrealism, and along what lines? Who says the first has "a distance, and erotic subtext"? And on and on, throughout the paragraph. I assumed I would go to those links and see a comparison of those two works, but I don't see that, we just have links to different paintings, and a whole bunch of unsubstantiated, unsourced verbiage which is both WP:SYNTH and WP:OR.  This sounds to me like a Wiki editor passionate about art, inserting their own opinions into the article. The entire paragraph, text, sources, and all, should be removed.  (As a secondary issue: those links are poorly done, with completely uninformative anchor text; but if the section is removed, that would be moot.)
I don't think this is the only example of this in the article, but I wanted to start with something concrete.  I just hope this is an isolated case, and not the tip of an iceberg. Mathglot (talk) 22:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraph could be more robustly sourced, but the second link does make a pairing; it reads: "From humorously clinical depictions of erotic events in the Dada period, such as Little Machine Constructed by Minimax Dadamax in Person, Max Ernst moved on to celebrations of uninhibited sexuality in his Surrealist works. His liaison and marriage with the young Marie-Berthe Aurenche in 1927 may have inspired the erotic subject matter of this painting and others of this year." Ewulp (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Good (and frankly more interesting, though more for the article on Ernst).  The rest of it does look like OR and PoV.  We can probably find RS that give some views on these works, and replace that wording with quotes from renowned art critics or something.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  23:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creeping SYNTH and OR