Talk:The Picture Maker

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that you can see Steven Spielberg in Washington, D.C.?

• Source: Smithsonian - "Also debuting will be 'The Picture Maker,' a newly commissioned portrait of Academy Award-winning director, producer and writer Spielberg by contemporary artist Capshaw....The National Portrait Gallery is located at Eighth and G streets N.W., Washington, D.C."

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Charlotte Bryant

Created by APK (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 16 past nominations.

APK hi :-) (talk) 20:04, 15 July 2026 (UTC).

• Doing... Beginning review now. I will endeavor to complete it within 24 hours. Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 20:42, 17 July 2026 (UTC)
  • New enough, long enough, well-written, neutral, no copvio detected, QPQ done. However, I am concerned the hook might be slightly misleading. Will we be seeing Spielberg himself in Washington, D.C., or a painting of him? I would suggest making that clarification. Let me know your thoughts. Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 23:16, 17 July 2026 (UTC)
    • @Zingarese: - I thought about an interesting hook and that's what came to mind. Technically people can see Spielberg, just not in person. I can change it to "that you can see a portrait of Steven Spielberg in Washington, D.C.?" but that would be incredibly boring. I'll try to think of a different hook from the content. I'll ask at WT:DYK if the current hook is a no-go. Thank you for reviewing! APK hi :-) (talk) 03:06, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
    • I was informed the current hook is not good, and to be honest, I can't think of another one that would be interesting. If you want to go ahead and add the rejected template that works for me. APK hi :-) (talk) 07:05, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
      • How about something like ALT1: ... that Kate Capshaw's portrait of her husband Steven Spielberg incorporates footage he shot as a teenager?Zzz plant (talk) 15:52, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
        Source: Town & Country Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 16:29, 19 July 2026 (UTC)
    • I personally see nothing wrong with Alt0 as the point of the hook is to entice someone to find out more about the sentence. Its not an easter egg and not misleading in any way, I would go with it.--Kevmin § 21:23, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
• @APK, Zzz plant, and Kevmin: I am absolutely not going to reject this nomination just because of a hook that falls a tad short! The article is wonderfully written and the story behind the artwork is quite affecting. Kevmin, yes, the point of a hook is to intrigue people and leave them wanting to learn more about the topic. But I believe the original hook fits the category of "excessively sensational" per WP:DYKGRAT. A typical reader will read it and think they can see the living, breathing Spielberg walking around the city. But once they realize it's just artwork in a museum that is in DC, they will most likely end feel baited. I am a huge fan of Zzz plant's hook. It is genuinely interesting and doesn't persuade through even the slightest subterfuge. If the nominator is okay with it, and after double-checking sources, I would be happy to sign off on ALT1. Please let me know what you think. Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 23:03, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

More sensational then a Spielberg

@Zingarese: I do not feel that scenario is anything close to a majority reality, especially given the wording is See, not meet. As a nominator for over a decade and a half, alt0 is no where close to violation of WP:DYKGRAT. There have been numerous hooks using similar wording accepted over the years involving Carmenelectra, Mona Lisa, and others just off the top of my head. Hell, one of my early hooks ran on April fools hook Termitaradus mitnicki with this image, and the hook ... that researchers have identified the pictured life form which no longer lives on this planet?. We can go with Alt1 if needed, but i feel the rejection reason for Alt0 shouldn't be a hasty nod to GRAT.--Kevmin § 00:21, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

@Zingarese:, ALT1 works. Sorry, I didn't intend to make an issue out of the nom. I'm just really bad at coming up with hooks and my mind went blank. (and if there's not a good hook, I don't nominate) Thanks @Zzz plant: for coming up with another one. @Kevmin: I was told over at WT:DYK that ALT0 wasn't interesting either way, so I'm not sweating it, but thank you though. APK hi :-) (talk) 03:02, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

• Wonderful--ALT1 is good to go. Thank you so much, everyone! Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 16:29, 19 July 2026 (UTC)