Talk:Dolly Rudeman

Background section

Are the two red links - Hague Drawing Institute and Academy of art - both actually Royal Academy of Art, The Hague which, according to its article, was originally named "The Hague Drawing Academy"? JennyOz (talk) 11:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Interstting. Thanks JennyOz, I'll look into it- although it sounds like you're dead right! Thanks for the heads-up.— fortunavelut luna 11:56, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dolly Rudeman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Usernameunique (talk · contribs) 02:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

   • 

2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

   • 

3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

   • 

4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

   • 

5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

   • 

Main review

1. It is reasonably well written.

a (prose):

Lead

• Box of information needed...
• "her father died when she was very young" — Before she was born, you mean?
• "when Dolly" — How about "when she" or "when Rudeman".
• "and eventually decided" — Can you be more precise than "eventually"?
• "There being so little financial stability in art, however, in her judgement, turned her towards" — Suggest "Concerned that there was little financial stability in art, however, she turned towards..."
• "She produced posters for some" — Suggest turning this into a second paragraph, beginning with something like "As a graphic designer, Rudeman produced..."
• "Dutch Cinema Trust" — What's this?
• "– when she aided Jews in hiding from the occupying Nazis –" — These should be em dashes, not en dashes. (Major point, obviously!) Also, you don't need the "in".
• "and she expanded" — Suggest "and during this decade she expanded" or "and saw her expand".
• "however, she did not achieve the fame she had had before the war" — Suggest making this its own sentence, and rephrasing to "She never achieved the fame that she had before the war, however, ..."

Background

• Suggest renaming section "Early life"
• "and, after the family moved to Batavia, by 1916 they had moved to The Hague." — A bit awkward, suggest rephrasing.
• "Rudeman would however cook Indonesian cuisine throughout her life." — First, "however" is somewhat overused in the article, and second, this sentence doesn't contrast with the previous sentence. Suggest rephrasing to "Despite leaving the country at an early age, Rudeman would cook..."
• "Rudeman stayed at" — Suggest "Rudeman attended".
• "the Hague Drawing Institute for drawing lessons" — Suggest deleting the second "drawing".
• "later moving to the Royal Academy of Art where" — Suggest adding "and" before "later", and a comma after "Art".
• Adding some years to the second paragraph would be nice.

Early career

• "She enrolled" — New section, so suggest "Rudeman enrolled".
• "she began working for the Dutch Cinema Trust, drawing posters." — Suggest "she began drawing posters for the Dutch Cinema Trust."
• "she taught private pupils as well as producing general illustrations." — Should be "pupils and produced..."
• "Rudeman's first- and one of the most" — I think you mean "Rudeman's first poster — and one...". Also, em dashes should be used instead of hyphens.
• "Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin in 1925." — Suggest "Eisenstein's 1925 movie Battleship Potemkin."
• "this was on top of the fact that" — I would delete this, it's unnecessary and wordy.
• "show (in fact they" — Suggest "show, and in fact they".
• "Het Vaderland famously declared" — What is Het Vaderland? A magazine? A trade publication? Something else? Also, was its declaration really "famous", and if so, why?
• "That same year, she" — Suggest "Rudeman" instead of "she".
• "producing around" — Suggest "producing about".
• "working under the" — Should be "where she worked under the".
• "in spite of the fact that at that point she had no experience of" — Suggest "despite her complete lack of experience with".
• "The results were well received, with coverage ranging" — Suggest "The results were well received; coverage ranged".
• "The magazine also wrote, for example, that" — You don't need the "for example".
• "However, the Cinema Trust commissions" — You don't need "However".
• "Barend Lugend" — Who? Why did he matter?
• "her posters had to be out before they commenced their run" — "they" actually refers to the posters here. Suggest "her posters had to be out before the movies they depicted."

Exhibitions

• Suggest moving the image to the right; on my monitor it interferes with the next section heading.
• "was a one day exhibition" — Missing a word, e.g., "was for a " or "was during a", and "one-day" needs a hyphen.
• "mourned the fact that it had only lasted for half a day." — Suggest "lamented the fact that it was so short."
• "This was an "extremely exclusive" gallery operating on an 'invitation-only' basis" — Why double quotation marks, then single quotation marks?
• "for between 75 – 500 guilders." — Should either be "between 75 and 500 guilders", or "for 75 – 500 guilders." Also, can you convert into what that would be today?

Post-war career and death

• "was forced to move to Amsterdam in 1941 and again in 1944" — Where did she move in 1944?
• "they took in a Jewish man" — Any more info on this? How did they know him? How did they keep him hidden? For how long?
• "the K.N.M.V Motor Races" — The what motor races?
• "etc." — Suggest "and the like" or "and similar".

Artistic style and criticism

• "and the influence of early German Expressionism has been noted." — This is confusing. Do you mean she was influenced by German Expressionism, or she influenced it?
• "Kate de Ridder" — Who?
• "De Groene Amsterdammer described the piece" — What piece?

Second read-through

• in note 1, do you mean Nijmegen?
• "designer of the poster must be of the same persuasion as the director of the film." — What does "the same persuasion" mean? Does it refer to artistic ability, gender, or something else?
• "government, her The Circus." — Is The Circus the name of the movie, or of the poster? If the former, suggest "for The Circus." If the latter, suggest "entitled The Circus."
• "She stayed in touch with Lugard too" — Who is Lugard? This is the first time you mention him (at least by name). Do you mean Lugend?
• "a major exhibition in the United States." — Details? Where/when? Was there an exhibition catalogue?
• "with the emphasis on young" — It's not clear what this means, and if it is the words of De Groene Amsterdammer, or of Anink & van Yperen 2005.
• "the image language and symbolism" — Is there a comma missing after "image"?
• "Circus (1928)" — Is this The Circus, described above?
• "Wings (1928):" — Close quotation mark is missing in the description of this piece.
• "van de Plasse" — Just checking that you mean to alphabetize by "P", or if this is a mistake that should be alphabetized under "v".

Thanks Usernameunique, check. Briefly- Yes, used [], yes, yes, sort of but not not much, rephrased, not in source, yes, well spotted, V. Various tweaks and reforats made along the way. Take care! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 08:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

b (MoS):

No major MoS issues detected (some minor issues with references, addressed below).

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

a (references):

• Ref 1: Doesn't have an end page.
• Ref 2: Switches from "last name, first name" to "first name last name". Also, should have full names, since that's the convention followed in the bibliography. Finally, "pp." is missing.
• Ref 16: Inconsistent inclusion of the "1" in the end page. Should either be "15–6", or you should include the dropped digit in the other references.
• Ref 17: Retrieval date needed.
• Ref 19: The author is unlikely to really be "DK", that probably just a Google Books automated data error. Also, end page number missing.
• Groot 2007: Language parenthetical (e.g., what ref 22 has) needed.

b (citations to reliable sources):

Sources appear reliable.

c (OR):

No OR detected.

d (No evidence of plagiarism or copyright violations):

None detected.

3. It is broad in its scope.

a (major aspects):

Covers major aspects

b (focused):

Article is focused

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy Article is neutral

5. It is stable Article is stable.

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

a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

Images have appropriate tagging.

b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Images need alt text. Also, it feels odd to have an article about a graphic designer without graphics of her designs. How about adding some of her designs, even if only fair use? What about a photogrpah of her?

7. Overall:

Pass/Fail: Serial Number 54129, review started. I still need to finish the prose sections ("Artistic style and criticism" and "Major works"), and I want to give the article another read through before addressing neutrality and breadth. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

• @Usernameunique: Many thanks for this. There were so many individual points in this WP:FAR WP:GAR that I addressed them all at once, so we can avoid lots of little {{done}}. Well, obviously addressed everything with one notable exception of course  :) I will ask Diannaa if we have grounds for fair-use. I hope so, as I even bought a copy of Potemkim to use  :) but I doubt it. Same for images of her: not many to say the least. Still, we can try. Incidentally, where you suggested a rewording, I've generally agreed—many thanks—and gone with your suggestions. Also split up some sentences and removed "howevers"... etc. Cheers, >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 16:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

You could certianly justify a fair-use on a photo of her (there's one at Discogs) and even one of the posters that's subject of discussion within the article and representative of her style. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Diannaa: That's great news, cheers- ok to have both, or is there a restriction on the amount of fair user material per article? Thanks for your advice! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 05:09, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, others care more about limiting fair use images than do I, but I don't think there is such a limit; an image of Rudeman, and an image of Rudeman's work, are used for different purposes. Also, haven't checked through the changes yet, but an infobox is still needed. Cheers, --Usernameunique (talk) 05:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Interrupting, if I may, why is one "needed"? Cassianto^Talk 08:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree, it would be nice to have a couple of images. Working on the pic of her as we speak. It's so ******* compicated though... do we have a categor for editors, "I Do Upload Rationales For Barnstars"?!  ;) >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 05:51, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Usernameunique: Check't. Images galore: Nice  :) >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 07:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, looks good. I've given it another read, made some small edits, and made a few more minor comments above (see "Second read-through"). Other than that, the three images are still lacking alt text, and an infobox is still suggested (but no, Cassianto, the lack of one will not prevent this article from passing). --Usernameunique (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Wasn't really my question; but that's for another day. As you were... Cassianto^Talk 22:36, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Cassianto, risking going off on a tangent here, but was your point to ask why it would be nice to add one to the article? If so, I just find them particularly useful in quickly getting a grasp on who an individual (or object) was, and the related significance. Also, since infoboxes tend to be relatively uniform, if there's a basic question that I want to get the answer to (e.g., where was one born), I usually look at the infobox first. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

No. I asked you why you thought "an infobox is still needed". Your comment suggested to me that you thought it was, for the purposes of a GA nomination, which it isn't. But since you've clarified this, there's no need to kick the dead horse. Cassianto^Talk 22:58, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks indeed to We hope for sorting that. Hard to imagine WP:ALTTEXT is part of the GA criteria, But. Anyway, thanks to the reviewer for all their time on this. Not forgeting Cassianto for clarifying other matters  :) Cheers, >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 08:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

• Serial Number 54129, all set, passing this. Can't imagine alt text is a requirement either, but hey, push for what you can get, right? Two things you could also think about addressing, but not major issues:

1. "Plasse, J., van de" is somewhat funky. It's fine if "van de" is in front of "Plasse" (like in an alphabetized list where "the" is included but not sorted by), I was just checking above that that was your intention.
2. The quotation across the entire page is somewhat unsightly. I'd suggest looking for a way that boxes it off like the others. --Usernameunique (talk) 09:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Right, nice one Unique; I misunderstood you about the van de; have changed it back. Much better that way! The quote box(es)... yeah, that's gonna take a little more nuanced tweaking so it doesn't push the section headings around too much. Thanks anyway! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 09:16, 24 January 2018 (UTC)