Talk:Shepard Fairey

message: I've removed the statements tagged as unreferenced from the article. They can still be found in the history if anyone wants to find the references and reintroduce them. It wasn't doing the article (or the artist) any good to have so many uncited claims.--Ethicoaestheticist 23:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: Fairey couldn't have bought property in San Diego as every building that was covered with his posters got razed by Mayor Golding.  If he had his own art in his house, the bulldozers were sure to follow.
Did Fairey do the "Expedition" decals?  Expedition what?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.157.164 (talk) 14:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Bought a home in San Diego" and the Expedition posters

message: Is this a PR piece. There is certainly a lot of criticism of fairey in the art world that deserves some inclusion here.
:This article gives no undue or unbalanced praise to Fairey. Granted there is certainly criticism that is not contained within, but that's the critic's job to add. LockeShocke 00:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that this source is a personal website, not a published, neutral third-part source. We must be careful with sources per WPBIO. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 19:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Then don't start an edit war. At least three other editors have questioned the validity of the source you are attempting to insert. The "facts" are not established and we must use caution when writing about controversial material per WP:BIO. Do not place the material back in the article until other editors have a chance to voice their opinions. Do not attack other editors, do not vandalize user pages and read WP:SOCK. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 20:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Please refer to WP:BLP#Sources: "Material about living persons available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all in biographies of living people, either as sources or via external links. Self-published books, zines, websites, and blogs should never be used as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article."--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am an admin and I have reviewed this conversation and the relevant edits. I completely endorse the statements of Freshacconci and Ethicoaeatheticist above. I have also removed material from this page per WP:BLP.  I gather there is more understanding now about wiki policies, and hope that matters have settled down. Tyrenius 03:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced some of the contested text that was recently removed . I've never had a problem with the Gleason comments, which seem to me to be legitimate art criticism.--Ethicoaestheticist 19:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and now I've added a published (in a book that is) reference replacing the Gleason video. Hopefully that will be that!--Ethicoaestheticist 20:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe it was less about Vallen's criticism than it was the WP:BLP#Sources restriction on self-published sources ("Never use self-published books, zines, websites, webforums, and blogs as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article."), to say nothing of Vallen's most notable accomplishment being, simply, the inclusion of his bio on Wikipedia. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

text: You can't be serious. If you can provide verifiable references to the portions of your entry I've called into question, fine and dandy. Otherwise, they should be deleted as being your own personal, non-neutral spin. The rest of your reply, I'll leave to the OpEd pages with no further comment. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Post whatever edits you wish and we'll see if they live up to Wikipedia neutrality. Judging from the predisposition of your comments, above, particularly after reading what is actually written in your referenced article, I'm willing to bet your neutrality will be called into question. I've got no problem with art criticism, but not without following Wikipedia's requirements in regards to sources, sourcing, living persons and neutrality. But, like I said, go for it and we'll see where the chips fall, eh? 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Maybe what you're missing is that, 1) I don't delete edits that are factually, verifiably and notably true-- even yours (you're batting around .500 so far) and, 2) those in which the quotes are not misrepresented (in which you're batting more in Little League range). I really don't care if it's pro-Fairey or anti-Fairey, as long as the quote is verifiable, factual and from a notable source (and, I should add, conforms to Wikipedia norms). This entry is not a platform for your personal opinion and biases. It is not your place to interpret or spin others' quotes. Present them and walk away. The very fact you interpret the NYTimes' article (Warhol, political art, et al) the way you do speaks volumes. Just stick to actual quotes, from real and notable sources, and you'll do just fine here. You, my friend, are the one who is taking things _way_ too personally. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 05:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article written by Obey fans 

message: The policing of this page by Ethicoaestheticist is biased. He seems to OR work for the company Obey OR seems to be policing Wikipedia without any kind of ETHIC. The critique, by Mark Vallen, a NOTABLE artist & curator, was PUBLISHED on his famous WEBSITE, not a BLOG, like Ethicoaestheticist tried to scam us with. Ethicoaestheticist, do your job if you are policing & CLICK on the links. READ them. DON'T JUST SUPPOSE. This is information for the world to see. You have NO RIGHT to do policing of Wikipedia if you make these kinds of GIGANTIC mistakes.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.17.133 (talk) 19:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that this source is a personal website, not a published, neutral third-part source. We must be careful with sources per WPBIO. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 19:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Then don't start an edit war. At least three other editors have questioned the validity of the source you are attempting to insert. The "facts" are not established and we must use caution when writing about controversial material per WP:BIO. Do not place the material back in the article until other editors have a chance to voice their opinions. Do not attack other editors, do not vandalize user pages and read WP:SOCK. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 20:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Please refer to WP:BLP#Sources: "Material about living persons available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all in biographies of living people, either as sources or via external links. Self-published books, zines, websites, and blogs should never be used as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article."--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am an admin and I have reviewed this conversation and the relevant edits. I completely endorse the statements of Freshacconci and Ethicoaeatheticist above. I have also removed material from this page per WP:BLP.  I gather there is more understanding now about wiki policies, and hope that matters have settled down. Tyrenius 03:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced some of the contested text that was recently removed . I've never had a problem with the Gleason comments, which seem to me to be legitimate art criticism.--Ethicoaestheticist 19:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and now I've added a published (in a book that is) reference replacing the Gleason video. Hopefully that will be that!--Ethicoaestheticist 20:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe it was less about Vallen's criticism than it was the WP:BLP#Sources restriction on self-published sources ("Never use self-published books, zines, websites, webforums, and blogs as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article."), to say nothing of Vallen's most notable accomplishment being, simply, the inclusion of his bio on Wikipedia. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

text: You can't be serious. If you can provide verifiable references to the portions of your entry I've called into question, fine and dandy. Otherwise, they should be deleted as being your own personal, non-neutral spin. The rest of your reply, I'll leave to the OpEd pages with no further comment. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Post whatever edits you wish and we'll see if they live up to Wikipedia neutrality. Judging from the predisposition of your comments, above, particularly after reading what is actually written in your referenced article, I'm willing to bet your neutrality will be called into question. I've got no problem with art criticism, but not without following Wikipedia's requirements in regards to sources, sourcing, living persons and neutrality. But, like I said, go for it and we'll see where the chips fall, eh? 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Maybe what you're missing is that, 1) I don't delete edits that are factually, verifiably and notably true-- even yours (you're batting around .500 so far) and, 2) those in which the quotes are not misrepresented (in which you're batting more in Little League range). I really don't care if it's pro-Fairey or anti-Fairey, as long as the quote is verifiable, factual and from a notable source (and, I should add, conforms to Wikipedia norms). This entry is not a platform for your personal opinion and biases. It is not your place to interpret or spin others' quotes. Present them and walk away. The very fact you interpret the NYTimes' article (Warhol, political art, et al) the way you do speaks volumes. Just stick to actual quotes, from real and notable sources, and you'll do just fine here. You, my friend, are the one who is taking things _way_ too personally. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 05:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark Vallen PUBLISHED a critique on a valid WEBSITE, not a BLOG, Mr. Ethico! 

message: I know, I know. You are doing your job. Very well I must say. But this article does need some serious wiki-expertise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.17.133 (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apology  to Freshacconci 

message: I noticed that consensus has been reached on this page about the issue of Mark Vallen's critique. While I disagree with the reasoning (I think exceptions to the blog rule should be made in instances where blogs are, or could be, the only sources for a relevant fact, notably Fairey's need to repay Rene Mederos). That said, I'll simply dig into Mat Gleason's published work and find a written example of his criticism (he is, after all, the editor of a published art journal). SiberioS (talk) 18:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it was less about Vallen's criticism than it was the WP:BLP#Sources restriction on self-published sources ("Never use self-published books, zines, websites, webforums, and blogs as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article."), to say nothing of Vallen's most notable accomplishment being, simply, the inclusion of his bio on Wikipedia. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

text: You can't be serious. If you can provide verifiable references to the portions of your entry I've called into question, fine and dandy. Otherwise, they should be deleted as being your own personal, non-neutral spin. The rest of your reply, I'll leave to the OpEd pages with no further comment. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Post whatever edits you wish and we'll see if they live up to Wikipedia neutrality. Judging from the predisposition of your comments, above, particularly after reading what is actually written in your referenced article, I'm willing to bet your neutrality will be called into question. I've got no problem with art criticism, but not without following Wikipedia's requirements in regards to sources, sourcing, living persons and neutrality. But, like I said, go for it and we'll see where the chips fall, eh? 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Maybe what you're missing is that, 1) I don't delete edits that are factually, verifiably and notably true-- even yours (you're batting around .500 so far) and, 2) those in which the quotes are not misrepresented (in which you're batting more in Little League range). I really don't care if it's pro-Fairey or anti-Fairey, as long as the quote is verifiable, factual and from a notable source (and, I should add, conforms to Wikipedia norms). This entry is not a platform for your personal opinion and biases. It is not your place to interpret or spin others' quotes. Present them and walk away. The very fact you interpret the NYTimes' article (Warhol, political art, et al) the way you do speaks volumes. Just stick to actual quotes, from real and notable sources, and you'll do just fine here. You, my friend, are the one who is taking things _way_ too personally. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 05:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Missed Consensus

message: Should there be a section for his political views? There are a lot of great quotes to work with from interviews he has done. I think a lot of people think he is far left and anti-capitalist but in reality he is not. Artblogs (talk) 23:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is less interested in your opinion and with what you think than with what you know and with what can be referenced in legitimate, notable and verifiable sources, particularly when in regards to living persons. Mr. Fairey's quotes regarding the need for artists and designers to make money, for art to fund itself, for the need for artists to start businesses and for the obvious realities of his many business ventures seem to be pretty self-explanatory. I'm fairly certain he's not thought of as a Marxist by anyone with any sense, even after reading the material already contained within this entry, and see no need for your efforts to further politicise the entry. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 00:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm jumping to conclusions? You presented your thesis from the outset: "I think a lot of people think he is far left and anti-capitalist but in reality he is not." (Hypothesis, faulty basis, premature (and likely inaccurate) conclusion.) Please don't think I'm taking this personally when it is your comments that are are belying your bias. A quick and impartial passover of my edits and comments will reveal I'm looking at balance; you, I'm not so sure about. 209.30.16.190 (talk) 05:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: His political views?

message: while looking up some info on mr. fairey, i was redirected to the fairey aviation company. would it not make more sense to either have a disambiguation page, or to have 'fairey' redirect here? it seems that he and his art are far more relevant in today's world.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Automatictransgression (talk • contribs) 21:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Disambig page done. We don't like to get too swayed by today's world, as after all wikipedia has to provide for tomorrow's world too. Ty 23:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirect? 

message: http://consumerist.com/tag/obey-giant/?view=full 
:http://consumerist.com/215151/fairey-responds-to-walmart-ripping-off-his-nazi-shirt
:Summary from http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm
"In 2006 Fairey printed a near exact copy of an already existing skull and crossbones artwork he found, altering the original design only by adding the words "OBEY: Defiant Since '89" along with a small star bearing the face of Andre the Giant. The image was reproduced as a T-shirt and added to Fairey’s OBEY fashion line.
As luck would have it, Wal-Mart plagiarized the master plagiarist, copying and printing Fairey’s rip-off and adding it to the superstore’s own fashion line. A shopper at Wal-Mart recognized the skull motif’s origin and angrily protested - as it was an exact duplication of the infamous logo belonging to the Gestapo, the Nazi "secret state police" that served as personal bodyguards to Adolf Hitler and administered the concentration camps where the genocide of the Jewish people was put into practice.
Unsurprisingly Wal-Mart’s T-shirts became a nationwide controversy, with legions of infuriated citizens insisting the superstore apologize and pull the offensive items from their shelves - a demand that was ultimately met. Eventually it came to light that Shepard Fairey was first responsible for manufacturing and selling the T-shirt, and when confronted by the website, consumerist.com, Fairey offered the following excuse: "When I made that graphic I was referencing a biker logo and it was only brought up to me later that it was the SS skull." 
The tone of these articles is confrontational: BUT, is it important/notable to mention, and can it be included while remaining NPOV? Cuvtixo (talk) 17:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consumerist.com: Shepard Fairey and Walmart with SS Nazi T-shirt design: 

message: The controversy section needs to be updated to cover Fairey's alleged assault and, likely related, the evident rejection of his less-than-well-received Ungdomshuset crater commission (See here). :bloodofox: (talk) 01:46, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Copenhagen: Controversial Ungdomshuset Crater Commission and Alleged Assault

message: I'm inclined to recommend referring to the Wikipedia article "Look Mickey" (the Featured Article on 2/21/2013) in which artist Roy Lichtenstein pretty much duplicated a copyrighted Walt Disney cartoon without the fuss  raised over Fairey's "Hope." Dick Kimball (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal issues with appropriation and fair use 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Shepard Fairey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080317191310/http://www.icaboston.org:80/exhibitions/upcoming-exhibitions/ to http://www.icaboston.org/exhibitions/upcoming-exhibitions/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090214223747/http://www.coloradodaily.com:80/news/2009/jan/15/obama-hope-poster/ to http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/2009/jan/15/obama-hope-poster/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20151018070325/http://www.metrobostonnews.com/us/article/2009/02/10/03/5003-72/index.xml to http://www.metrobostonnews.com/us/article/2009/02/10/03/5003-72/index.xml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Shepard Fairey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150905054741/http://www.icaboston.org/exhibitions/upcoming-exhibitions/ to http://www.icaboston.org/exhibitions/upcoming-exhibitions/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:16, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Shepard Fairey. 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/20110726164840/http://www.icaboston.org/about/pressreleases/shepard-fairey/ to http://www.icaboston.org/about/pressreleases/shepard-fairey/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151019182508/http://laist.com/2011/04/20/because_even_our_libraries_are_cool.php/ to http://laist.com/2011/04/20/because_even_our_libraries_are_cool.php/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106141157/http://walrusmagazine.com/articles/2008.09-art-the-renaissance-of-cute-nick-mount-graffiti-banksy-art/ to http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/2008.09-art-the-renaissance-of-cute-nick-mount-graffiti-banksy-art
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hDOSTkSGL3Y07dY0qQToV5B552pw
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090123172834/http://gothamist.com/2007/06/21/interview_shepa.php to http://gothamist.com/2007/06/21/interview_shepa.php
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) 04:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Shepard Fairey. 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/20131029213935/http://www.independentmail.com/news/2009/jan/17/local-womans-grandson-behind-obama-hope-poster/?partner=RSS to http://www.independentmail.com/news/2009/jan/17/local-womans-grandson-behind-obama-hope-poster/?partner=RSS
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090223120518/http://studionumber-one.com/support1/about.html to http://www.studionumber-one.com/support1/about.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216035557/http://creativity-online.com/?action=news:article&newsId=124743§ionId=behind_the_work to http://creativity-online.com/?action=news:article&newsId=124743§ionId=behind_the_work
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://lafund.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101110050545/http://www.magnoliaeditions.com/Content/Garcia/F00001.html to http://www.magnoliaeditions.com/Content/Garcia/F00001.html
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) 05:02, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone is pushing a POV here.  I have responded on the nomination page.   GetSomeUtah (talk) 11:17, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I propose merging Obey (clothing) into Shepard Fairey. I think the content in Obey (clothing) can easily be explained in the context of Shepard Fairey - if it isn't already, and a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Shepard Fairey. --95.99.94.82 (talk) 07:33, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal