Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/DeLancey W. Gill/archive2

DeLancey W. Gill[edit]

Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DeLancey Walker Gill is an interesting fellow. He was notable for his ink drawings and watercolors of D.C. in the late 19th century, and the absolutely massive catalogue of photographs he took of Native American delegations to D.C. in his work for the Smithsonian and Bureau of American Ethnology. Last year, I attempted this as my first FAC, back before I had really learned the ins and outs of writing articles to FA standards. Recently, I went back to the drawing board, and made all the fixes I could to satisfy the issues raised at the peer review and FAC: I hope it is to everyone's liking! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajpolino[edit]

A lovely read on a person I knew nothing about. Small comments:

"Gill's art... have been described" feels like singular/plural disagreement, unless there's something special about the word "art".
- Oops, fixed! - G
"highly detailed", "highly meticulous", "highly distinct" - "highly" feels like a meaningless filler word here. Those adjectives are already strong on their own.
- Good point, I'll remove these. - G
"brought a considerable ~~amount of~~ acclaim"
- Good fix. - G
Bureau of American Ethnology is wikilinked twice a couple sentences apart.
- Fixed. - G
"reviewing hundreds of thousands of copies of printed illustrations per year." I don't have access to the source, just checking in to make sure this is accurate. There's only a few hundred thousand waking minutes in a year, so it's a surprising number.
- It's almost verbatim what the source says; I think this means watching the printing presses as they run rather then like, hand-expecting each individual issue. I rephrased this a little to make it less weird. - G
It's a bit surprising to hear that he becomes USGS "chief of illustration", then is assigned BAE (part of USGS, I gather?) "supervisor of illustration". Does the source clarify at all the difference between these positions?
- I have no idea what the difference is, and I'm unsure if those are the official titles. Rephrased this, good point. - G
"Following Andrew John's death... to Bureau custody." feels like we're losing the thread of Gill's biography a bit here.
- Yeah, good point; I tried to add more context but it waters down the prose.
"In one 1903 sitting, In one 1903 sitting," typo.
- Fixed! I'm disappointed I missed this. - G
"From 1903-1905... photograph them." is this important to Gill's biography?
- I think it's important context that he delegated his workload to another photographer. Tightened up the prose a bit. -G
"He also collected antiques, described as an expert..." reword. Reads as if "described as an expert..." is expanding on the word "antiques".
- Good point, fixed. -G
"fracturing his skull after falling down a staircase at his home" I am always eyeing the wood stairs in my home with this exact scenario in mind. I will redouble my eyeing.

I'll return for another readthrough with fresh eyes. Thanks for the read. Ajpolino (talk)

@Ajpolino: Ah, I realized I forgot to let people know when I had implemented the fixes. This stuff has been corrected! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ajpolino:, not to bug, but was just wondering if you had the chance to look over the fixes! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Ah, my mistake! Will get back to this within the next day or two. Ajpolino (talk) 02:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Happy to support this article for FA. An interesting and enjoyable read. Ajpolino (talk) 12:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Homestead sketch is missing alt text
- Fixed. -G
File:Mr._De_Lanay_Gill,_Bureau_Am._Etymology_LCCN2016821491_(cropped).jpg: when and where was this first published and what is the author's date of death?
- No date of publication, but it's in public domain as part of the Library of Congress' National Photo Company Collection, which is in the licensing of the image's page on Commons. -G
File:DeLancey_Gill,_Mouth_of_James_Creek.tif: when and where was this first published? Ditto File:Pueblo_Bonito_Ruin,_Chaco_Canyon,_New_Mexico_SAAM-1955.9.4_1.jpg, File:Portrait_(Profile)_of_Samuel_Schanowa_in_Partial_Native_Dress_with_Ornaments_February_1905.jpg
- I just slapped a PD-US-unpublished on these, since I don't have any specific evidence that any of them were published during Gill's lifetime. For the last one, I added PD-USGov-SI since it's part of the National Anthropological Archives. -G
File:DeLancey_W._Gill,_sketch_of_Washington_homestead.png needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:54, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Added. - Generalissima (talk) (it/she)

Airship[edit]

As always, these are suggestions, not demands; feel free to demur with justification. Just a few comments to start with:

The sectioning is a little odd: "Early life" combined with "painting career", but separated from "Photography", which has its own "reception" subsection whereas "early life and painting career" does not. FWIW, I would be inclined towards an all-encompassing "biography" or "life" section, with subsections of "painting", "photography" and "personal life", but that is a suggestion.
- Yeah, sectioning is weird, and I was kinda unsure about what to do. I actually like your idea a lot better here; since the painting wasn't exclusively part of his early life. - G
I am always slightly suspicious of lengthy paragraphs depending on a single citation: in this article there are two (beginning "United States Geological Survey (USGS) chief of illustration William Henry Holmes..." and "Gill has been criticized for..."), both cited to Glenn 1983.
- The first is for some reason cited to the whole of Glenn's article, instead of the two starting pages it would appear to depend on? I find "In part due to this admiration, Gill rapidly was promoted through the USGS" slightly ungrammatical, as well as "In this duty". I also don't think that "Gill managed the publication of illustrations and photography, overseeing the production of hundreds of thousands of copies per year" is a full reflection of the source, or that Glenn explicitly says that Powell "assigned" Gill to supervise illustration for the BAE.
  - Ack, forgot to correct that sfn. Sadly, Glenn 1983 is just the only source which bothered to cover this period of Gill's life. You're right about those weird turns of phrases, corrected them. And fair enough on the second part, I took another crack at phrasing those. -G
- The second paragraph is better, although it ends with the odd phrasing "In other cases, Gill photographed "show Indians". Glenn p. 18 describes two cases of Gill photographing "show Indians": the Henry Hunt family, and the four Dakota, who are described earlier in the paragraph without reference to their "show" status.
  - Good catch there. Elaborated on the Dakota part and brought it to the end of the paragraph. -G

Apologies for the delay.

the positioning of File:DeLancey W. Gill, sketch of Washington homestead.png is a little odd, not only the centering, but that it might very well be the earliest image in the article, and yet comes third. Perhaps place it alongside Mouth of James Creek ({{multiple image}}?)
- Ooh, yeah, good point. I added multiple image for James Creek/Pueblo Bonito and put the sketch by itself.
I'm unsure (perhaps as a non-American) what precisely "native delegations to Washington" means.
- Clarified this a bit more. - G
You might want to join the paragraphs in "Photography" that don't focus on portraiture together ("In 1889, Gill discovered...", "He also accompanied Holmes...", "In addition to portraits..."), as the section currently feels a bit disjointed/unfocused.
- Good idea. - G
In general, the second and third paragraphs of the "Photography" section feel a bit confused.
- The tracing of the history of the BAE photographer position feels a bit irrelevant, Dinwiddie especially.
  - I was able to reduce this down a bit. - G
- Did the portraiture of Native Americans solely consist of photographs of the "delegates"?
  - Yeah, except when in the field. Clarified. - G
- "began in the 1860s and 1870s" sounds like it should use the pluperfect.
  - Done. - G
- I don't know why the sentence about Hayden is relevant.
  - I was trying to give context, but you're right its not needed. - G
- Presumably "the early course of Gill's photographic career" doesn't include the part before his 1898 appointment, but a less vague timeframe than "the early course" would be better.
  - Good point. - G
- With the added context of a multiple-year-long period, I don't think "peaking in [a non-year-specific-season]" is the best choice of wording.
  - Fixed this up. - G

More to come: ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: just checking in! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to review as in-depth as I would like, so I believe it is a weak support from me. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TechnoSquirrel69[edit]

Putting my name down for this later. I'll take the source review. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Alright, let's do this thing. Citation numbers from this revision.

Citations 4 and 5 can be merged as below.
- Thank you! I didn't think to merge sfns like that. I will do this a lot going forward. - G
"little if any artistic license" needs attribution to Goff. Also, citations 6 and 7 can be merged as {{sfn|Goff|2016|pp=203, 208}}.
- Good point, fixed. - G
Why are Library of Congress citations are treated as web citations (access dates, archive links) while other newspaper citations aren't?
- No clue, fixed this. -G
For the record, I did an IABot run to standardize the linking style across the board. —TS
Citation 9c doesn't seem to verify any of the preceding information.
- Good catch, that's not needed there. - G
In citation 31: |pp= → |p=
- Fixed. -G
Does Miller 1992 need an |author-link= to any of the entries at Cheryl Miller (disambiguation)?
- Oh right, it's Cheryl D. Miller. - G
  - Actually, it very well could be that Cheryl D. Miller, but I can't be sure. Whoever this Cheryl Miller was is Curator of the Washington D.C. Historical Society in the early 90s, but from Miller's bio on here, she would have been in NYC at the time (and seemed to be focused on design rather than design history after college.) We might hilariously have two Cheryl Millers from D.C. who have both published on art and design history of the district in a roughly similar timeframe. - G
In Eldredge 1986: add |author-link=[[Charles C. Eldredge]]
- Thank you! -G
Only some of the book citations have locations, which make them look inconsistent. Unless we have locations for all of them, I'd recommend removing. At risk of becoming a broken record, I also think that locations have become rather unnecessary in the age of the Internet.
- I like locations for that old style charm to them, so I added them into the other cites. - G

Now working from this revision.

Something's off with citation 23; my copy of the source doesn't exceed 22 pages.
- Fixed! - G
Citation 26 needs an |access-date=, as it's an online source.
- Fixed. - G
"the dignity of a court justice" → "the dignity of a chief justice"
- Fixed. - G
Also, the "[...]" implies that the quote is an abridged version of a single statement, which the source doesn't support. Just using the quotes individually should be fine.
- Good point, corrected. - G

General comments[edit]

Maybe my lack of familiarity with biographies is showing, but why are all the headers under a seemingly-redundant § Biography?
- I previously had this broken up as three first-level headers of Early life and painting career, Photography, and Personal life. Airship pointed out these weren't really necessary, especially cause his painting career didn't chronologically fit into a discrete section. Promoting the second level headers would unnecessarily break up the text - and thus, Biography. This is a common trick: sometimes you see it as "Adult life" when there's an easily splitable Early Life section, or a Career when it's that plus a personal life, but Gill's early life section would be like two sentences, so I just threw it all in together. - G
"Washington D.C." should be "Washington, D.C.," in running prose; this occurs in multiple places.
- Ah right! Corrected. - G
"whiskey" is an excessive link.
- Also corrected. - G
There are several sentences like "have been characterized as inartistic" and "Gill has been criticized" that come off as weaselly, especially when the view is only supported by a single source. Searching for the word been highlighted a few of these; I'd recommend you scan through the prose and rephrase these where they occur, attributing where necessary.
- Went through and stomped the weasels. -G

Let me know if you have any questions! Also, I'd love if you could drop some comments on my FAC, which is currently a bit light on reviews. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoSquirrel69: alrighty! I think I got to everything here. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and good work so far! Additional comments are above, and I think that should be the last of them. Aside from a couple hiccups, spot-checks are going pretty smooth. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoSquirrel69: Fixed the rest up. :3 Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed. Neutral on prose, which I only did a light skimming of in my review; I'll leave judgment of that aspect to the other reviewers. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

review from sawyer-mcdonell[edit]

saving myself a spot. i'll focus on prose, since that's what you asked for :] ... sawyer * he/they * talk 06:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, clocking in now.

in the leade - His portraiture has been praised for its pictoralist qualities it's "pictorialist", no?
- I can't believe I didn't catch this! Yes, it is. - G
His father William Harrison Gill, a merchant, was killed in action in the Confederate Army I think this would be better as "killed in action serving in the Confederate Army"
- Indeed. Fixed. - G
Washington D.C. is abbreviated variously as "D.C." and "Washington" - it would probably be better to pick a single abbreviation for the city.
- I like that it gives the text a bit of extra diversity, but you're probably right. Settled on Washington, giving the full title when it could potentially be ambiguous. -G
In 1894, Powell resigned from the USGS to focus on administration of the BAE, Gill following four years later in order to continue work on Bureau publications. should be "with Gill following four years later" or "and Gill followed four years later"
- Good point, fixed. -G
He married fellow Smithsonian illustrator Mary Irwin Wright on August 19, 1895 and with her had Minna P. Gill, a suffragist and librarian. They divorced in 1903, although continued business relations for some years afterwards. - this reads as a bit clunky to me. Perhaps "He married fellow Smithsonian illustrator Mary Irwin Wright on August 19, 1895 and they had Minna P. Gill, a future suffragist and librarian. Gill and Wright divorced in 1903, although they continued business relations for some years afterwards." ?
- Good point, fixed! - G

... sawyer * he/they * talk 19:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sawyer-mcdonell: Okie dokie artichokie. That should be good. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:57, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
looks good to me - i don't think i have anything else that hasn't already been pointed out by the other reviewers. at this point, happy to support :) ... sawyer * he/they * talk 20:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan620[edit]

I, too, am saving a spot for a prose review. I used this article as bedtime reading last night, and while I didn't finish (started a little too close to lights-out), I liked what I did see and I look forward to reading this more in-depth. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 22:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments:

I note that we learn the name of Gill's father, but not his mother. Is the latter known information, and is there a way it can be incorporated into the article?
- Sadly, I could not find that in any of the sources. - G
"often depicting Black families in domestic life" – I'm not sure if the 'b' should be capitalized.
- This is a hotly debated stylistic issue. TLDR: Both capitalizing and not capitalizing is valid per MOS. - G
  - In that case, I would recommend capitalizing 'white' later on in the article as well as any other racial adjectives for consistency's sake. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 04:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Oh yeah, fixed. - G
"Contemporary art criticism was favorable to Gill's work" – this reads a little awkwardly. I would suggest rephrasing to "Gill's work was favorably received by contemporary art critics"
- Oh yeah, much better phrasing. Thank you! - G
"Gill rapidly was promoted" → "Gill was rapidly promoted"
- Good fix, added. -G
Where multiple citations appear together, the smaller numbers should appear first; there are a few places where this can be fixed, such as after "claiming it was exactly how he was taught to sign by a friend" and a couple places in each of §Painting and §Personal_life.
- Oops, thought I had resolved this. Fixed! - G
"They divorced in 1903, although continued business relations for some years afterwards." – This sentence is a little clunky; is there a way to reword it?
- Gave it a shot. - G
  - Hmmm, this is a little better, but I think replacing "although" with "but" would flow more smoothly. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 04:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Good call, fixed. - G

All in all, this is a fascinating and professionally-written article, and I look forward to supporting once these minor points are addressed. BTW, if you have any time or interest, I would love some feedback in a very old FLC. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 18:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dylan620: Responded! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Generalissima: Appreciated! Just a couple small follow-ups and we should be good to go. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 04:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Dylan620: And fixed! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Generalissima: Awesome possum! Support. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 05:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]