Talk:Charles Saatchi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Business and economics Portal
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
B rated as b-Class on the assessment scale
Low rated as low-importance on the assessment scale
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Margaret Thatcher

There is a line in the "life" division which shows his work for Mrs Thatcher in 1979. Beside it is a completely irrelevant extract about General Pinochet. Delete?



[edit] Origin of name

soThe word saatchi doesn't sound Arabic, especially the suffix, "chi". Could it be Turkish? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.139.195.162 (talk • contribs) .

I have deleted "in Arabic" until and unless it can be verified. Tyrenius 15:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

ساعة or 'sa3a' means watch. The chi is an Iraqi pronounciation of the suffix 'ji', which is added on to a word to denote a profession. An example of this is the Iraqi politican , pacha being an Iraqi dish.

The word "saat" is Arabic, the suffix "chi" is Turkish. Lets not mix language structures please. "Chi" suffix is very widely used suffix in Turkish and i looked at most of the professions in Arabic and i have not seen any profession ends with "chi" except mr. Pachachi`s. Also in the article it is said that "saatchi" is a persian word. Please correct it.
For example explanation of turkish suffixes please check it out. http://www.turkishlanguage.co.uk/ekler.htm

[edit] Tracey Emin

I don't think it's accurate to say that "Tracey Emin appear[s] not to understand the significance of [her] own random creations." True, she did a television interview where she appeared to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs and was not coherent. But she is certainly not unaware of the significance of her work. NSpector 23:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the whole bit about "curator as creator". It's unsourced and libelous to Emin. Freshacconci 00:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
(Not to mention hardly new. A curator assigning meaning to a work of art not intended by the artist? That never happens!) Freshacconci 00:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BLP concerns

Posts 1, 2, 3 copied from User talk:Tyrenius and User talk:Infoart to centralise discussion. Tyrenius 01:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

1)Hi Tyrenius, I was in contact with the Saatchi Gallery a couple of weeks ago re: copyright clearence, and today they've contacted me on an unrelated Wiki matter. It seems that there has been some libellous material included in Charles Saatchi's Wiki page and the gallery were wondering who to contact to report their concerns and have this material permanently removed. I just had a look at the page, and in going through the page history I noticed that you've previousy edited out this material on June 20, but it has been reincluded since. Looks like it's be removed again today by another user, however the gallery are quite concerned that it should not be reinstated. Would you mind looking in on this matter? If you or another Wiki representative could please contact Philippa Adams at Saatchi gallery directly she would really appreciate it. Her email is: [commented out] Many thanks for your help. Very best, --Infoart 23:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

2)I saw your note to Tyrenius re: Charles Saatchi. I'm not sure something can be permanently edited out of an article. Since anyone can edit wikipedia, anything can be added. It's up to vigilant editors to catch the vandalism and issue warnings. Vandals can eventually be blocked from editing, but vandalism will always be an issue. Occasionally, a page can be removed and an administrator can remove all traces of that article, especially if the article is libelous. However, in the case of Saatchi, he's too much of a public figure to be removed from wikipedia (and I'm guessing that's not what's wanted here anyway). He'll always have an article, and will probably always be a target for vandals. That's both the nature of fame, and wikipedia, I'm afraid. Probably not the answer you wanted. I won't contact the email you gave Tyrenius. I'm not an administrator and perhaps there is something else that can be done. But in my limited experience on wikipedia, I'm fairly certain that there's little that can be done but revert the vandalism as it happens. There are certainly a few editors who have the Charles Saatchi page on their watch-list, so changes will be monitored. I've added it to my watch-list and I sent a warning to the last vandal. If he keeps it up, I'll report him to admins who can block him. Freshacconci 00:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
3)There is a bit of a difficulty here. While some of the hostile version is outright false, much of it is just as reliably sourced (from here) as the material that is cited (from here), which ought to be just as much a concern over bias as it presents Okamoto as the bad guy. The trick is getting the balance. Gordonofcartoon 01:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Some of the material might be better dealt with in Saatchi Gallery with a briefer mention here. Tyrenius 02:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:Malikeel. Different identities have been used to replace material in the article. Tyrenius 02:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the substance of the reverted material, see The Guardian, 22 October 2005, where it can be found. That does not necessarily mean of course that it will be included in the article in the way that it has been. That would give it undue weight, per WP:NPOV. Tyrenius 02:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Since there has been contact from an involved outside third party, is this a matter for the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard? As it does not appear to be pure vandalism (thus simply revertible) and falls under Due Weight/Sensitivity considerations it may be that we need the assistance of BLP warriors in keeping this article within guidelines. LessHeard vanU 12:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Yep; that'd be good. As I said above, some of it is straightforward reversion fodder, but a summary of the dispute within BLP constraints is going to be a rather more subtle task, given that a lot of the crit appeared reliably sourced and only wrong via the undue weight given. Gordonofcartoon 12:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, caution is needed, so that one event does not get blown out of proportion. For anyone editing this, there are also reports in The Times.[1][2] Tyrenius 21:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm awaiting a response from Infoart before submitting a notification to WP:BLP/Noticeboard since I am roughly three parts removed from the original comment. I would prefer someone with a closer knowledge of what has been said to be available for clarification if needed. If the re-inclusion of the unflattering material continues I will refer anyway. LessHeard vanU 22:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You

I've just received word from the Saatchi Gallery that Tyrenius has been in contact with them. Thank you very much for your speedy reply T. And for the kind advice from everyone. Best, --Infoart 18:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)