Talk:Hilda Rix Nicholas/GA1

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:24, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok will review this.......Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:24, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Alright - interesting painter. Had not heard of her until coming across this article. I think the choice of paintings is good (one really capturing the Australian light and another from Tangier), maybe get one of the war ones too?
 * One image added - unfortunately I didn't find an illustration of the three main oils, possibly because at least one was destroyed over half a century ago. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The prose in the lead might be a tad too economical/dense - I like using neat little subordinate clauses but I think the lead might flow better if you massaged a couple of sentences:


 * e.g. Her father an education administrator, her mother a musician and artist, Rix Nicholas studied under leading member of the Heidelberg School, Frederick McCubbin at the National Gallery of Victoria Art School from 1902 to 1905.  - something about this sentence is just a little too busy, yet it strikes me splitting it into two would make two too-short sentences....
 * Have fiddled - take a look. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  The Rix children came from a gifted and energetic family. --> " The Rix children grew up in a gifted and energetic family." - "came from" makes me thibk you're going introduce new elements somehow....
 * Changed. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  (known as Merton Hall) --> "(then known as Merton Hall)"?
 * Actually, it is still known by that name. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Aaah, my bad...those quirky Melburnians....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It'd be interesting to know what her mother painted I think,
 * Added a little on that.hamiltonstone (talk) 12:14, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  Rix Nicholas twice visited north Africa. In January 1912, Rix Nicholas joined American painter Henry Ossawa Tanner, his wife and a Miss Simpson on a trip to Morocco. - try and avoid using her surname twice in such quick succession
 * Tweaked. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Align the In Australia painting next to the prose that discusses it?
 * Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe link nationalism?
 * Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Link post-modernism at first instance?
 * I think you mean post-impressionism? It is linked once in the lead, and at the first occurrence in the text that is not part of a quote...hamiltonstone (talk) 11:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * d'oh! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * One of hte articles online mentioned a major review in 1971 - worth mentioning in Legacy maybe.
 * Done, as well as a couple of others. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Any detailed critique on any of her more notable paintings would be good I think to help focus the article more on her art.
 * I added this... hamiltonstone (talk) 10:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Aaah, that's the icing on the cake and the sort of material that the page was lacking as none of her paintings have articles of their own - the article needed something more on her work. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

A nice read overall and heading comfortably for GA status......

1. Well written?:
 * Prose quality:
 * Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
 * References to sources:
 * Citations to reliable sources, where required:
 * No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:
 * Major aspects:
 * Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
 * Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?
 * No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
 * Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: - fine article - I tried to be as exacting as I could to give it as big a shove as possible to FAC. I think it is within striking distance. feel free to ask someone to take a look. Will ping. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Superlede
The lede section is FAR too big. Hitler, Churchill and Queen Elizabeth II don't get ledes that big. The lede is meant to be a summary of the main reasons why the subject is notable, and should excite readers to read on. It shouldn't be an only slightly condensed version of the entire article. --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  21:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jack. I checked WP:LEAD and I don't think it supports either of those points. It says the lead should summarise the article, not only notability, and should be written so that someone reading only the lead will get all the main points. In that page's guide to lead length, it suggests three or four paras for an article of greater than 30,000 characters, which this is (33,000 characters). That said, if you think there's particular content in the lead that, for example, gets undue attention compared to its importance to the subject, I'm happy to hear - i've been working on this closely for a while, so fresh eyes can help! hamiltonstone (talk) 22:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)