Talk:Friedrich Eckenfelder/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 03:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, going to be reviewing this article. Give me a few moments to get started!

This article has a major concern that jumps right out at the beginning, it is almost entirely sourced on "Walter Schnerring (1984) (in German). Der Maler Friedrich Eckenfelder. Ein Münchner Impressionist malt seine schwäbische Heimat. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag." And this qualifies for the tag 'Single source'. For an objective point of view, and better analysis I must insist that additional resources be required. While this is not a strict point of the criteria it is implied that a neutral and fair article will have several different sources and views from different individuals. The one source tag seems very much valid to me, and as a GAN, that tag would be relevant.
 * Unfortunately there are no more sources.--Tomcat (7) 09:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed a few typos, if they are some regional matter feel free to revert them back. It did not appear correct to my checkers or my eyes.

Some of the prose needs work. In the paragraphs for 'Youth' we have 'The boy's talent for drawing..' and 'The fourteen-year-old boy was raised'. These are poor form and could be made clearer. Sections like 'The Munich period' have off-topic or curiosities which seem to add nothing to the article. Such as the notable teachers of the school, or the concerns of the son who opened a book shop. Furthermore, lines like this MUST be sourced, "Eckenfelder's biographer Walter Schnerring notes an increasing alienation." As a sentence is also poor form. Though such contentious material and possible claims extend throughout the entirety of the article. Here is another example, "Many people in Balingen—even Eckenfelder's relatives—turned a blind eye to the relationship because they found it embarrassing." These lines need a direct inline citation. I do believe you are able to tell which lines these are. Since the prose itself needs much tweaking and cleaning up, I do believe you can address this matter when doing so.
 * --Tomcat (7) 09:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Also, one of your pictures has no description. Some of them are still under copyright in the USA, there use seems fine though.

Your external link to http://www.balingen.de/servlet/PB/menu/1238489/index.html is reporting 404ed since August 20th 2012.
 * Removed the link.--Tomcat (7) 09:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Some of the prose seems very close to a the type of text that would be found in your source, I cannot verify this, but please make sure that a direct translation is not used, but your own words which relay the information in the source. This piece is of concern, "When Eckenfelder returned to Balingen, he met Elsa Martz. 18 years his junior, she was an alto singer and piano teacher from a prosperous middle-class family. When she was young, she had enjoyed going to the opera; however, her family regarded this as beneath their station. Despite or because of receiving many marriage proposals, she had remained single. She and Eckenfelder developed a platonic love." It reads like the biographer's words, not yours. You've made two direct references to the biographer's interpretation, any such interpretation must be duly marked and noted with an inline citation.

I'm going to put this on hold, it needs a lot of work. I won't quick-fail it, but my concerns are great.ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments.--Tomcat (7) 09:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

On second thought, I am quick failing this after looking at the German Wikipedia. Google translate was also disturbing here. Since most of the work seems to have been transposed directly from German Wikipedia, I am not certain that this applies for GA. While certainly a notable painter, the fact of one source and the similarity is just too great to ignore. Feel free to get a second opinion on this, but I do not feel comfortable passing this until it is rewritten and improved beyond the one source. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:14, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Content in Wikipedia is freely distributable and reproducible (see WP:ABOUT), so I can easily copy and past the whole text. Furthermore it is in a different language. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 15:19, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * And can you please decide whether you are failing or holding it for a second opinion? There is a clear difference.--Tomcat (7) 15:24, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Since the complete file history or the original German version up to the date of the translation is incorporated it is not just copy and paste and as the initiator and main author of the German version I am proud and happy that the translated version has made it to this stage. Eckenfelder is a painter who is not much known very much beyond the view from the top of the mountains surrounding his hometown Balingen. So therefore there is not much literature about him. There is probably nothing beyond Schnerring, but of course one could try to make the effort to study the literature he has cited. This will not bring further knoweledge to the article, because I doubt we will draw different conclusions from this literature than Schnerring did. The only improvement we will get is that Schnerring's sources will be cited directly. But will we get new insights beyond Schnerring? --Wuselig (talk) 00:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Tomcat7, you are incorrect in your ability to copy and paste, you are specifically not allowed to copy and paste without crediting the authors as per the policy and license. If I were to copy and paste any article, even a direct machine translation of the work, it would be a violation of Wikipedia's policy and the CC BY SA 3.0 license. This is on every page you edit. It does not mean you can do as you please or claim credit for another editors hard work.
 * Secondly, 'on hold' does not mean that I am requesting a second opinion. It was pending fixes and changes. While you may not like the decision I am making, I am making it out of concern about the article's very valid concerns. I haven't tagged it as such, but the one source tag applies. Also I've pointed out many issues with the prose, a lack of in-line citations and points that come off as original research. If you are unable to address these matters then it will not pass GA. #3 of the Quick Fail criteria is "There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including, , , or large numbers of , , , or similar tags." I am going to place those now. This is a fine article, but it has issues that prevent it from becoming a good article according to the good article criteria.
 * Third, as the matter of the translation is quite eerie to a machine translation that little alarm bells started going off in my head. I believe this needs an explanation as to the nature of the translation and how it was done. Because of this, I am under the impression that you (Tomcat7) do not have access to the source material. Then, because of this strong assumption which is noted in both a current machine translation of the German article and the current English in this article, I believe that some very close paraphrasing (an unacceptable amount) is present. Furthermore, because direct opinions of the biographer are put in without inline citations and without regard as to the audience my suspicion approaches a point at which I cannot expect it to be completed within a week.
 * And lastly, please do not undo my decision to quick fail it. You are more then welcome to refile or have a different editor review instead of me. I have long since passed the point of being comfortable with this article, my approval will not be granted today or likely within a week from now. End of story. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * TLDR: Do you Tomcat7 have that book on hand to address these issues? I suspect no, so rather then letting it languish for a week, I quick failed it and tagged it appropriately. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2012 (UTC)