Talk:Art in modern Scotland/GA1

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

I have one last exam tomorrow, after which I will review the rest of the article. Thanks for waiting! &mdash;  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' ✅
 * 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 ✅
 * "They were John D..." - better to introduce them when you first mention them. ✅
 * They have been described - They were described - this is not contemporary description.
 * would be a - was a ✅
 * link 'First WW' ✅
 * 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' ✅
 * better to be consistent: use Fergusson instead of J.D. Fergusson ✅
 * 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'? ✅
 * while a student - as a student ✅
 * remove 'strongly' ✅
 * who was in Dundee and who in Montrose? The word "respective" is in this sentence.
 * link for surrealism? ✅
 * and the work of Bruegel and - use something other than 'and' for the second time ✅
 * J.D. Fergusson should be Fergusson ✅
 * Link Second WW ✅
 * remove 'had no single style, but' Why? - seems important to say this.
 * remove 'strongly' ✅
 * 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. ✅

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

References and images
Everything looks fine here! &mdash;  Yash! [talk] 10:12, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 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? &mdash;  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. &mdash;  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. ✅

Later twentieth century to the present

 * Post-War - Post-war ✅
 * Better to not use words like 'highly influential' ✅
 * Barns-Graham (b. 1912-2004) and Margaret Mellis (b. 1914-2009) - Remove 'b.' ✅
 * 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. ✅
 * both grouped - grouped ✅
 * Scottish Realism or Scottish realism? Please be consistent ✅
 * better to introduce the pups in the start, preferably after 'and the Glasgow School of Art'  ✅
 * has a comic book-like quality and puts - had a comic-like quality and put ✅
 * Currie has revived - Currie revived ✅
 * Important - Notable ✅
 * 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 ',' ✅
 * 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 ✅
 * the new Millennium - please write that in years ✅
 * 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! &mdash;  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 ✅.--  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):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Everything looks in order. Passing it. &mdash;  Yash! [talk] 21:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your effort on this.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Everything looks in order. Passing it. &mdash;  Yash! [talk] 21:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your effort on this.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your effort on this.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)