Template:Did you know nominations/Károly Ferenczy
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:33, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Károly Ferenczy[edit]
- ... that Hungarian painter Károly Ferenczy had three children, each of whom became artists in different media?
5x expanded by Biruitorul (talk). Self nom at 18:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- ALT1:... that although Hungarian painter Károly Ferenczy was not religious, he depicted Bible scenes in some of his work?
- Reviewed: Ghenadie Petrescu
Length good. Date good and size of prose expansion >5x. Prefer original hook, AGF for original hook sourcing (subscription needed to access Oxford Art Online.) Reads well, lead section should be expanded per MOS:LEAD. Copyvio check run, clean. (not able to check against paywalled sources) Nice expansion. The Interior (Talk) 18:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- Note to queue-maker, several good PD images associated with this article if you are short on noms w/images. The Interior (Talk) 18:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
-
- Grammatically, not sure. But "each of whom" does sound better. The Interior (Talk) 21:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing concerns. Example: "His works from this period feature the use of a unifying pearl grey tone that binds together the pale tints and lends a gentle, pensive mood to the whole composition" vs "Ferenczy’s works of this period is characterized by the use of a unifying pearl grey tone that binds together the pale tints and lends a gentle, pensive mood to the whole composition". Nikkimaria (talk) 16:08, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- Is this the only problematic sentence, or does this article need a major rewrite? The Interior (Talk) 05:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- Major rewrite - that was a particularly egregious sentence, but fairly large swathes of the article are minimally paraphrased. If you or any other reviewer would like a copy of the subscription source in question, let me know. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- I've responded on the talk page. For the reasons I've outlined, I think this is a case where some tweaking can address any outstanding issues, and I'd be grateful if you could point out your other objections over there. - Biruitorul Talk 20:50, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- Nikkimaria, maybe you could email the text, that way I know what we're talking about. The Interior (Talk) 21:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Nikkimaria, maybe you could email the text, that way I know what we're talking about. The Interior (Talk) 21:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- I've responded on the talk page. For the reasons I've outlined, I think this is a case where some tweaking can address any outstanding issues, and I'd be grateful if you could point out your other objections over there. - Biruitorul Talk 20:50, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- Major rewrite - that was a particularly egregious sentence, but fairly large swathes of the article are minimally paraphrased. If you or any other reviewer would like a copy of the subscription source in question, let me know. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Agree major rewrite in order. The article has gone to the copyright problems noticeboard, so I think there is little chance of passing this. The Interior (Talk) 02:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
:Note: Please hold this for the meantime, the author has requested interest in rewriting. The Interior (Talk) 20:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Author does not have time for rewrite per comment on my Talk. Please remove as closed. The Interior (Talk) 05:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)