Talk:The Colossus of Rhodes (Dalí)

Suggestions

Thanks for the review, Mduvekot. How would you suggest improving the article further? --Usernameunique (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Upon re-reading, I think my initial assessment was incorrect; the article is at least B-class. Mduvekot (talk) 15:16, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Colossus of Rhodes (Dalí)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 04:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

GA criteria

Well-written:

With the one grammatical error I found corrected, the article satisfies the MOS policies on grammar as well as general layout/structure. To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:12, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article uses a large number of reputable sources, and makes frequent inline citations to them. There does not appear to be any original research. To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:11, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article seems to bear sufficient coverage of all expected aspects of its topic. To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:10, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

The article approaches its topic in an unbiased light. To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

The article has not suffered from any editing disputes since its creation. To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

The sole image used in this article at present serves the obvious purpose of depicting the painting which is the subject of the article. As a non-replaceable fair use image, it has an appropriate license and fair use rationale provided. To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:08, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

While I must apologize for the nearly two-month long wait - I had all but forgotten about this one - on the upside as far as GA quality goes it looks to be a shoe-in. Congratulations! To the point that the words have become unintelligible. (talk) 02:13, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, Wilhelmina Will! No problem on timing—definitely worth the wait. Cheers, --Usernameunique (talk) 02:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

George Frédéric Keller and Carstairs Gallery

It may be relevant to note that Georges Frédéric Keller (1899-1981)[1] was the head of the Carstairs Gallery in New York from c.1950 (also redlinked, but we have its founder Carroll Carstairs, who died in 1948) merging it with the Bignou Gallery after the death of Étienne Bignou in 1950. I believe Dalí exhibited at Carstairs several times, and Keller seems to have represented Dalí at both galleries, which is presumably how Keller acquired the work.[2] 213.205.198.241 (talk) 08:54, 6 April 2019 (UTC)