Talk:The Fourth Estate (painting)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jburlinson (talk · contribs) 14:04, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll be glad to review this nomination. Thanks for your patience. I should have an initial review done within 5 days.--Jburlinson (talk) 14:04, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Overall, this is an excellent article that only needs a few touchups on the references to attain GA status.--Jburlinson (talk) 11:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   (1) A reliable source is needed for this sentence, especially since it contains quoted material: "Thanks to the various drawings, preparatory studies, and "photographs of the models in pose," Pellizza was able to draft the definitive version of Fiumana in July 1895". (2) A reliable source is needed for this sentence fragment, especially since it contains quoted material: "Pellizza decided in 1898 to make the work for a third time on "the greatest demonstration that the Italian proletariat could boast between the 19th and 20th century." (3) A reliable source is needed for this sentence; otherwise, it appears to be an editorial perception or OR: "These figures turn their gazes in other directions, suggesting they have complete control of the situation." (4) A reliable source is needed for these two sentences; otherwise, they appear to be an editorial perception or OR: "On the one hand, this compositional solution recalls classical friezes. On the other, it evokes the realistic scene of a street demonstration." ( 5) I believe there needs to be a reliable source for the identifications in the "Models" section. --Jburlinson (talk) 11:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

   Will reply shortly (1-2 days) with recommended changes.—Wingedserif (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

   Reply status: 1.  Doing...; 2.  Doing...; 3.  Done xentence deleted because couldn't find source to support; 4.  Doing... Found citation to support first sentence but not second, yet; 5.  Doing... Added citations to news source that identifies the models and some of their biographic details. Hoping to find another source to support the other model bio information. —Wingedserif (talk) 19:09, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

   I'm hoping to have access to the source I need to verify those claims next week; will update then. —Wingedserif (talk) 01:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

   That's fine. I'll keep the review open until you've had time to finish up. Thanks for working so hard on this article.--Jburlinson (talk) 14:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

   1.  Done: In the cited 1998 source, I found a photograph by Pellizza of the models posing for the composition, rm quote marks since I couldn't find the phrase (I hope this isn't OR?); 2.  Done: found direct Italian quote to support this; 3.  Done: see previous reply; 4.  Done: same source supported both claims, put exact quote in R template; 5.  Done: Added above-mentioned news source, but also additional citations where I could find them in the Scotti books. —Wingedserif (talk) 18:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Excellent work on this article. Happy to rate it as GA. Congratulations to all who contributed.--Jburlinson (talk) 10:53, 13 August 2021 (UTC)