Talk:Ivan the Terrible (1945 film)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Jaguarnik (talk · contribs) 16:46, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Pagliaccious (talk · contribs) 16:56, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello Jaguarnik, I will be reviewing the article. I'll try to be responsive enough to finish things before September, since I'll also be busy, but this is my first GAR and you've nominated a pretty thorough article. Pagliaccious (talk) 16:56, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your review; looking forward to the review. Jaguarnik (talk) 18:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @Jaguarnik: I've finished with most things besides the ref checks. Overall, the article is well written, I just have a few notes below. Lots of great hooks if you take this to DYK! My favorite is
Eisenstein tasked the makeup artist, Vasily Goriunov, with making Ivan resemble at different points of the film Nebuchadnezzar, Judas, Uriel Acosta, Mephistopheles, and Jesus Christ
. Also interesting to me is thatEisenstein wrote that the relationship between Ivan and Vladimir mirrors the one between Rogozhin and Prince Myshkin
andIvan in the scene of his near-death resembles Hans Holbein's Dead Christ
. I believe that this is the painting which Rogozhin shows Myshkin. Kind regards, Pagliaccious (talk) 20:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)- Thank you very much! Will definitely consider these hooks.Jaguarnik (talk) 22:14, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @Jaguarnik: I've finished with most things besides the ref checks. Overall, the article is well written, I just have a few notes below. Lots of great hooks if you take this to DYK! My favorite is
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- Overall, very well written. There's just a few things I'd like to nitpick.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Looks good to me. I copyedited a few minor things.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- I would do a read through the article and see where more links could be added (avoiding overlinking), and see where links could be moved to their first occurrence. Some examples: boyars is not linked until its second mention in the plot summary despite being in the lede;
Livonian ambassador
is not linked but a later mention of Livonia is;holy fool
is mentioned four times without a link to Foolishness for Christ; Metropolitan of Moscow is linked at its second occurrence in the plot summary.- I've linked Livonians and boyars to their first occurence, linked Foolishness for Christ to the mention of holy fool, linked tsarina's family to House of Romanov, linked Dmitri to his wikipedia article. I'm not sure whether to link the first mention of Fyodor Kolychov to Philip II, Metropolitan of Moscow or just leave it as linked to the first mention of Kolychov's monastic name. I don't see where Metropolitan of Moscow is referenced before part II, but it's possible that the first mention was removed while I was editing the plot summary. I'll take a second look later to see if I haven't missed anything.
- For the plot section, I tried to refer to WP:PLOTSUM and a few example GAs like Citizen Kane and Solaris (1972 film). At about 1350 words it's well over the 400-700 word guidance from WP:PLOTSUM; while that's probably allowable for a two-parter, I still think that the plot summary could use some trimming. I don't think that there's an exact word count to aim for, and I think that over 700 is fine here, but a lot could be done. For example, the phrase
sowing the seeds of doubt into his heart
is excessive. As an example of trimming, you could reduce something like: In the cathedral, the assassin stabs the mock tsar and is immediately seized by Fyodor and Malyuta. Yefrosinya arrives, jubilant at the apparent death of Ivan, until she sees him alive; she realizes that Vladimir has been killed. Ivan orders the two to release the assassin, and thanks him for killing not only "a fool", but "the tsar's worst enemy". He leaves Yefrosinya, who has gone insane over her son's death, in the cathedral
- to something more concise like
In the cathedral, the assassin stabs the mock tsar and is seized. Yefrosinya arrives, celebrating the death of Ivan. After she sees him alive, she realizes that Vladimir has been killed and goes insane. Ivan orders the two to release the assassin, and thanks him for killing not only "a fool", but "the tsar's worst enemy".
- Another minor detail is the italicization of oprichnina and oprichniki. From MOS:NONENGITALIC it seems that both should be italicized, which the article does for the most part, but there are several instances where this is missed.
- I've gone through and italicized mentions of oprichnina and oprichniki; I'll address the other issues shortly.Jaguarnik (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've tried to cut down the summary as much as possible; I will look at it later and see if I can't cut it down more to essential details while keeping the summary clear. It may be difficult to have the full summary be just 700 words, since so much happens in this film. Will work on the linking next.Jaguarnik (talk) 21:01, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I mentioned it in an amendment above, but definitely don't worry about getting down to 700 words, or even any specific word-count. It's not really an issue of essential details but of inessential details. For example,
and send him a ceremonial knife with the suggestion that he do himself a favor by using it to commit suicide
isn't as essential as the plot-important fact thatIvan calms the crowd, but is interrupted by envoys from the khanate of Kazan, who announce that Kazan has declared war against Muscovy
. You're right that a lot happens in the film, so again don't worry about that 700 mark. Maybe look for 1000-1100 if you really need a threshold. Pagliaccious (talk) 21:30, 19 August 2024 (UTC)- I've managed to get it down to 1098 words, please let me know if there's any further issues with the plot summary + length. Will work on addressing the links + other issues. Jaguarnik (talk) 22:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I mentioned it in an amendment above, but definitely don't worry about getting down to 700 words, or even any specific word-count. It's not really an issue of essential details but of inessential details. For example,
- I've tried to cut down the summary as much as possible; I will look at it later and see if I can't cut it down more to essential details while keeping the summary clear. It may be difficult to have the full summary be just 700 words, since so much happens in this film. Will work on the linking next.Jaguarnik (talk) 21:01, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've gone through and italicized mentions of oprichnina and oprichniki; I'll address the other issues shortly.Jaguarnik (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I would do a read through the article and see where more links could be added (avoiding overlinking), and see where links could be moved to their first occurrence. Some examples: boyars is not linked until its second mention in the plot summary despite being in the lede;
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- I haven't gone through the entire article yet, but one thing I noticed while reading through for the well-written criterion:
After he evacuated to Alma-Ata, Eisenstein offered him the role
. What was Kuznetsov evacuated from? I took a look at the Yurenev (1974) source referenced, but I didn't see it explained, just mentioned that he evacuated. It's an interesting detail.- I believe Kuznetsov at the time was based in Moscow (as he was filming for Mosfilm) and most of the actors based in Moscow/working for Mosfilm were evacuated to Alma-Ata according to Neuberger, but I'm not quite sure where specifically Kuznetsov was at the time of evacuation. Does this need rewording? Jaguarnik (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Either rewording (
Eisenstein offered him the role when the two met in Alma-Ata
, for example) or just an explanation of from where/why the actors were evacuated. It seems like a noteworthy inclusion, and would also need explanation when you mention Eisenstein's evacuation earlier in the article.- I've added a brief context in pre-production that actors working for Mosfilm were evacuated to Alma-Ata, and added in "casting" that Kuznetsov also evacuated to Alma-Ata; please review it and let me know if there's any issues with the wording + additional issues here.Jaguarnik (talk) 21:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Looks perfect Pagliaccious (talk) 21:43, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've added a brief context in pre-production that actors working for Mosfilm were evacuated to Alma-Ata, and added in "casting" that Kuznetsov also evacuated to Alma-Ata; please review it and let me know if there's any issues with the wording + additional issues here.Jaguarnik (talk) 21:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Either rewording (
- I believe Kuznetsov at the time was based in Moscow (as he was filming for Mosfilm) and most of the actors based in Moscow/working for Mosfilm were evacuated to Alma-Ata according to Neuberger, but I'm not quite sure where specifically Kuznetsov was at the time of evacuation. Does this need rewording? Jaguarnik (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll go through every eighth reference (about 15 total) to spot check. I'll finish later tonight.
Edited by Sergei Eisenstein, Esfir Tobak
: Tobak 1998.
Looks good, I just added a page number to the sfn.
Eisenstein began research on the film in early 1941. Among his sources were Heinrich von Staden's and Andrei Kurbsky's writings about their lives in Ivan's court and his reign, and Ivan's correspondence with Kurbsky. Additionally, Eisenstein read the biography of Ivan by Robert Wipper and the writings of historians Sergei Solovyov, Vasily Klyuchevsky, Alexander Pypin, and Igor Grabar
: Neuberger 2014, p. 301.
Great summary
Production on the film was delayed to April 1943
: Neuberger 2014, p. 303.
Looks good. I changed this to
Production on the film was delayed due to the ongoing invasion of the USSR until April 1943
for context, still mentioned in the source.
For the portrayal of 17-year-old Ivan, makeup artist Vasily Goriunov used adhesive to glue back the flesh on Cherkasov's face. This also had the effect of limiting Cherkasov's ability to move his face. The actor disliked this solution, saying that the makeup made him look not like a 17-year-old, but like a fetus
: Oeler 2018, p. 50.
- (Looking for a copy)
- I should clarify that Cherkasov's comment on looking like a fetus comes from Yurenev, not Oeler. Oeler states that
Particularly in the coronation scene, where Cherkasov’s Ivan is at his youngest, the makeup, while it helped create the “outer form,” impeded the actor’s ability to move his face. Goriunov used adhesive to pull back the looser, more creased flesh of middle age, transforming the forty-year-old actor into a smooth-cheeked teen.
If you have access to Wikipedia library, you can access a free copy on De Gruyter.
- I should clarify that Cherkasov's comment on looking like a fetus comes from Yurenev, not Oeler. Oeler states that
- I haven't gone through the entire article yet, but one thing I noticed while reading through for the well-written criterion:
- C. It contains no original research:
- Passes, see spot-check above.
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- Looks good using the Earwig CopyVio tool. I'll cover this more in the spot-check under part 2A.
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Looks good overall, but it seems to me that a major detail is left out of the body. In the lead, it is written that
it was banned on the order of Stalin, who intensely disliked its depiction of Ivan
. In the Screenings and release section, this is left unmentioned besides that Stalin was unhappy with Ivan's portrayal in the second part. If the banning of the film is important enough to mention in the lead, it should certainly be mentioned in greater detail in this section.- I'll review what the sources say to see if I can't add more detail; as far as I remember it was screened before the committee which disliked it, then Stalin watched it, disliked it, banned it, and met with Eisenstein + Cherkasov to explain what was wrong with the film.
- Looks good overall, but it seems to me that a major detail is left out of the body. In the lead, it is written that
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- Looks good to me, but I might ask for a second opinion since there's a wealth of detail and I don't have much experience distinguishing between overly detailed articles and extremely notable, detailed articles. On the subject, is there a reason this detail is commented out at the bottom of the Allusions section?
Eisenstein admired Walt Disney's films, being inspired in particular by Snow White and The Sorcerer's Apprentice, and encouraged his actors for the kind of "plasticity" that Disney's animated characters had.
- I had planned to add that detail in, but wasn't sure if it was necessary to add, so I commented it out and forgot about it. I might remove it entirely, since I'm not sure that it merits mentioning in the article. Jaguarnik (talk) 20:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- That makes sense. I think that if it's not immediately related to Ivan the Terrible, the Allusions section can probably go without this detail.
- Removed.
- That makes sense. I think that if it's not immediately related to Ivan the Terrible, the Allusions section can probably go without this detail.
- I had planned to add that detail in, but wasn't sure if it was necessary to add, so I commented it out and forgot about it. I might remove it entirely, since I'm not sure that it merits mentioning in the article. Jaguarnik (talk) 20:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail: