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 RoySmith (talk) 00:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Overall: Very fine article with good sources that made it to DYK (just barely!) within a week of creation. No copyright violations detected by Earwig. Thumbs up to ALT1, which I feel is the more interesting of the two offered.
Thanks for this great DYK! Also, with respect to the translation, I thought the present one was just fine and the editor's concern pedantic. Both of her knees are bent, after all. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:37, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Could the article please explain why the English title just says "bent", while the German "angezogen" describes that the knee (only one!) is raised high up to her head? I don't know if there's an English equivalent. My translator proposes "drawn up" and "tucked in". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: And oof, I don't know about the translation. I actually saw many sources use the plural "Knees", although the museum in Prague that currently has the piece lists it with a singular "Knee" on their official web entry for it (which is included in the article's notes). I also found sources calling it "Seated Woman with Left Leg Drawn up" (currently included in the note as well). This "Sartle" source (not currently included in the article, as I don't think it'd count as an RS, not sure though) calls it "Sitting Woman with Legs Drawn Up". And this MeisterDrucke.uk source (also not included in the article for the same reason; I don't think it'd qualify as an RS), calls it "Sitting woman with raised knee". So there does seem to be some usage of the "Legs Drawn Up" or "Raised Knee" terms. I'm not really familiar with the German language so I took the Sitzende Frau mit angezogenem Knie from this Wikimedia Commons file. However, this file calls it Sitzende Frau mit hochgezogenem Knie. Soulbust (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
The correct title seems to be "Sitzende Frau mit hochgezogenem linken Bein", [1], [2], the latter - a book with that image on the cover - even providing a good translation which you have above, "Seated Woman with Left Leg Drawn up". I'd use that for the article title. "Knees" doesn't make sense, not even one of them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
The image on the commons should also be changed, probably best to the German original title. GRuban, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
The image is titled "Sedící žena s pokrčenými koleny" at the source, https://sbirky.ngprague.cz/dielo/CZE:NG.K_17864 I don't know Czech, but the automatic translator turns that into "Sitting woman with bent knees". If someone who is a true expert on the subject says otherwise, I won't stand in the way, but if I was titling the image I'd go with the title from the source. (In fact I'd use the Czech, since Commons is not English-only.) --GRuban (talk) 14:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I have no problem with changing the title of the article. Although, I was wondering if maybe WP:COMMONNAME applies here since a lot of the English-language sources use the Bent Knees or Bent Knee title?
The Seated Woman with Left Leg Drawn up title is currently mentioned and cited in the article, but I also have seen Seated Woman with Legs Drawn uphere and here, and that latter title is also used in the title of one of the Wikimedia commons files I linked to earlier. Soulbust (talk) 22:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
I think an Albertina title is better than a "translation" that fails to see that the legs are drawn/lifted/whatever differently. The 2 links: I have an access problem with the first, and get an error with the second. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:11, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
I think I may have fixed the second link. Soulbust (talk) 20:13, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, I can see it now. It says that Schiele named it, followed by that English title, which is of course nonsense, - he would have named it in German. Did he? Or is the title not by him? Whatever, no source to be taken seriously. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Very fine article with good sources that made it to DYK (just barely!) within a week of creation. No copyright violations detected by Earwig. Thumbs up to ALT1, which I feel is the more interesting of the two offered.
_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg){kind=link}
