Talk:Art in modern Scotland

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Art in modern Scotland/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Yash! (talk · contribs) 21:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I will give my initial comments by tomorrow. Thanks! — Yash! ^[talk] 21:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks for taking this on.--SabreBD (talk) 23:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Lead

• Art in modern Scotland includes all aspects of the visual arts in Scotland - Art in modern Scotland includes all aspects of the visual arts in the country  Done
• What does 'work of the Four mean?'  Done
• major artists, including - artists, such as  Done
• Best to not use words like 'successful'  Done
• Scotland possess significant collections of art, such as the - Scotland has significant collections of art at places like  Done
• Linking Edinburgh and Glasgow would be better for a reader who would like to read about those cities  Done
• Significant schools - Prominent schools. Since you use 'significant' in the previous sentence.  Done
• The major funding body with responsibility for the arts in Scotland is Creative Scotland. Support is also given by local councils and independent foundations. -  Done
• The major funding body responsible for the arts in Scotland is Creative Scotland, with support from local councils and independent foundations as well.  Done

I have one last exam tomorrow, after which I will review the rest of the article. Thanks for waiting! — Yash! ^[talk] 17:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I have implemented these so far, except the last one, which is a bit of a run on sentence. What is the problem with the original here, because it seems clear and grammatical to me?--SabreBD (talk) 18:44, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Early twentieth century

• link 'Celtic Revival'  Done
• helped define - defined - well no that is what the text says - too much credit to say they defined it.
• 'knew each other and' - no need to include that. - I think there is - it cannot be implied by the rest of the sentence.
• and all looked - and looked  Done
• "They were John D..." - better to introduce them when you first mention them.  Done
• They have been described - They were described - this is not contemporary description.
• would be a - was a  Done
• link 'First WW'  Done
• They were influenced by French painters and the St. Ives School[6] and their art was characterised by use of vivid and often non-naturalistic colour and the use of bold technique above form. - too much 'and'  Done
• better to be consistent: use Fergusson instead of J.D. Fergusson  Done
• Don't use words such as 'probably'. If it is not certain, better to remove that part Sometimes things are not certain, but still worth mentioning.
• link for 'vorticism'?  Done
• while a student - as a student  Done
• remove 'strongly'  Done
• who was in Dundee and who in Montrose? The word "respective" is in this sentence.
• link for surrealism?  Done
• and the work of Bruegel and - use something other than 'and' for the second time  Done
• J.D. Fergusson should be Fergusson  Done
• Link Second WW  Done
• remove 'had no single style, but' Why? - seems important to say this.
• remove 'strongly'  Done
• resident in - resident of - clarified
• whose produced illustrations for the work of Robert Louis Stevenson and Paul Strand (1890-1976), who produced atmospheric depictions of Hebridean landscapes. - whose and who sound odd. Better to rephrase it.  Done

Will review the remaining article later today. Thanks! — Yash! ^[talk] 08:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

References and images

• Please add WP:ALT to the images. You know this is a FA not a GA requirement - right?
  • Yeah but i always bring that up at my GARs. What's the loss in adding it? — Yash! ^[talk] 21:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
• Scotsman.com should not be in italics Do you have a link to the MOS for this one. This seems to be quite correct in many guides outside Wikipedia, but I have not found anything internally. Also seems to implied as correct since templates italicise this.
  • I read in some GA review that anything that is not printed should not be in italics. I am not able to find that review though. — Yash! ^[talk] 15:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
• There is no need to include full reference that are in 'Notes', in 'Bibliography' as well - This article uses a short title for repeat refs, but full for the first instance.
• guardian.co.uk - The Guardian. Also link it.  Done

Everything looks fine here! — Yash! ^[talk] 10:12, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Later twentieth century to the present

• Post-War - Post-war  Done
• Better to not use words like 'highly influential'  Done
• Barns-Graham (b. 1912-2004) and Margaret Mellis (b. 1914-2009) - Remove 'b.'  Done
• Also a visitor to Paris was Alan Davie (b. 1920),[24] who was influenced by jazz and Zen Buddhism and moved further into abstract expressionism. - Also a visitor to Paris was Alan Davie (b. 1920),[24] who was influenced by jazz and Zen Buddhism, moved further into abstract expressionism.  Done
• both grouped - grouped  Done
• Scottish Realism or Scottish realism? Please be consistent  Done
• better to introduce the pups in the start, preferably after 'and the Glasgow School of Art'  Done
• has a comic book-like quality and puts - had a comic-like quality and put  Done
• Currie has revived - Currie revived  Done
• Important - Notable  Done
• who have received - who received - We are in the present tense now.
• However, he has received little acclaim from critics. - However, he received little acclaim from critics. Also in the present tense now.

Institutions

• National Museum of Scotland, - remove the ','  Done
• I am not sure if 'the' should be used in 'from the decorative arts'. Probably it should not be there. It looks right to me - we would talk about "the arts" not "arts". See also the opening sentence of Decorative arts.
• If NGS and SNGMA have national and International collections, then best to combine those sentences - Except one is modern and one not - so I cannot see how to express that as being the same.
• Glasgow galleries - start that from a new paragraph  Done
• the new Millennium - please write that in years  Done
• has had - had - they did not stop having them - continuous past tense is correct.
• in the city in 1760 and was established in 1907 - in the city in 1760, was established in 1907 - clarified

This wraps it up. Thanks for writing the article! — Yash! ^[talk] 06:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

OK I have implemented all I can without in some way changing the meaning of what is said. Everything I have just done is marked with a  Done.--SabreBD (talk) 14:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Result

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, 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):

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:

   Everything looks in order. Passing it. — Yash! ^[talk] 21:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all your effort on this.--SabreBD (talk) 22:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of leading contemporary Scottish printmakers and Studios

May I suggest the addition of leading contemporary printmakers Barbara Rae and Elizabeth Blackadder to the 'Later twentieth century to the present' section, perhaps under a new 'printmaking' heading?

The prestigious Glasgow Print Studio and Edinburgh Printmakers could also be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NovaBlueWave (talk • contribs) 11:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)