Talk:Frances Brundage

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Frances Brundage/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 09:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: fixed one dab.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 09:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot: no dead links found. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Brundage received her art education from her father, and, at the age of seventeen, was forced to earn a living from her art after Lockwood abandoned his family. Non sequitur, no connection between the two clauses, better as two separate sentences.

   Brundage died on March 28, 1937, aged 82 years. Stand alone sentences are discourage in the WP:MOS.

   Suggest that the lists of publications should be condensed to the more notable. Currently the list content outweighs that of the prose.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Only one source is used and I am worried about this. What makes it a reliable source?

   I suggest more sources be found. If the subject is notable enough for a Wikipedia article then there should be better sourcing.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article contains little detail of how her work is regarded apart from an opinion on a personal website. In fact the whole is basically just a rewording of that website.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Hard to say without other sources

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This article desperately needs expansion from other sources than a personal webiste. The lengthy list of publications hould be trimmed. I feel it is not yet of sufficient quality for GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:09, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

• Wow! Where did you find this article? I listed it first with GA Literature then moved it to GA Arts and Architecture and thought I pulled it completely from the GA queue about a month ago because I realized it was not up to par and planned to rework it. I never expected it to be reviewed, but good job! I'll get back to this and work with the suggestions for improvement. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 17:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Took care of the prose issues and deleted list of publications until the most notable can be determined through sources. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Frances Brundage. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.ortakales.com/Illustrators/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Ethnic illustration

The final paragraph of the article on her 'ethnic illustrations' seems mostly personal opinion to me. The harmless depiction of racial stereotypes existing at all, much less in the time this white artist was working, seems difficult to prove. If someone can prove these stereotypical depictions of race were 'positive dramatization', feel free to do so, but I think it's nigh impossible and the entire paragraph should be struck. Plus, the ellipse doesn't suit Wikipedia writing rules at all. This is a weird position for the article to take. Tttttarleton (talk) 18:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)