Wikipedia:Featured article review/Kitsch/archive1

Kitsch

Review commentary

Brilliant prose promotion, no original author. Messages left at Germany and Aesthetics. Sandy (Talk) 22:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

This brilliant prose promotions has no citations, has become an External link farm (some commercial promotions), has a trivia section, and is filled with weasle words and what appears to be original research, editorializing, and opinion. There are several cite needed tags, and a good deal of redundancy in the prose. Sandy (Talk) 22:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree, plus the pictures are not great Johnbod 02:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment It is listy in sections, and needs inline citations (1. c. requirement). LuciferMorgan 21:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment There is an obvious need for inline citations. Some of the weasel words might be from the original sources, but without citiations no one can know that. While acknowledging the difficulty of creating an article on such a poorly-defined subject, the article is still in desperate need of improvement. Badbilltucker 17:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• Move to FARC, no significant improvement. Sandy (Talk) 14:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria are citations, trivia section, and prose (lists). Joelito (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Remove—The quality of writing does a good job in depicting the topic. Take just the lead:

"Kitsch is a German term that has been used to categorize art that is considered an inferior copy of an existing style. The term is also used more loosely in referring to any art that is pretentious or in bad taste, and also commercially produced items that are considered trite or crass.

Because the word was brought into use as a response to a large amount of art in the 19th century where the aesthetic of art work was confused with a sense of exaggerated sentimentality or melodrama, kitsch is most closely associated with art that is sentimental; however, it can be used to refer to any type of art that is deficient for similar reasons—whether it tries to appear sentimental, glamorous, theatrical, or creative, kitsch is said to be a gesture imitative of the superficial appearances of art. It is often said that kitsch relies on merely repeating convention and formula, lacking the sense of creativity and originality displayed in genuine art.

Though kitsch and kitschy may be terms used to criticize, the term is sometimes used as a compliment as well, with some finding kitschy artwork to be enjoyable for its "retro" value or unintentional, ironic humor or garishness."

• It's a German term, but it's now an English term too. Need to insert "originally"?
  • "Categorize" is pretty ungainly, in concept and phonology.
  • "in referring to" --> "to refer to"
  • Replace the em dash with a semicolon or a period?
  • Many people will object to the concept of "genuine art". Why isn't kitsch genuine?
  • "kitschy"—is that a word? "May be terms used to"—clumsy.
  • "Some"—some what?
  • "Where" should be "in which".

Very messy and lacking authority. This should be binned. Tony 12:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

• Remove: lack of inline citations (unverifiable), too many non notable trivia and most of them uncited and orphaned paragraphs. — Indon (reply) — 13:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Remove. Under-cited and with listy and trivia sections.--Yannismarou 19:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Remove Insufficient inline citations. LuciferMorgan 14:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)