Talk:Louise Nevelson/GA1

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

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) 01:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Early personal life
 * "While still in Europe, Minna and Isaac gave birth to two of Nevelson's siblings". They didn't both give birth, that was Minna's job.✅


 * "Two years later the family sold their home in Russia, and in 1905 Minna and the children emigrated to the United States". It's not quite clear which family we're talking about, as we were told in the previous paragraph that Minna joined her parents in Kiev after Isaac left for the US. Was it her parents who sold their house? What happened to them, as apparently only Minna and the children followed Isaac to the US? ✅
 * I don't know what happened to the grandparents (if they stayed or moved, I think they stayed based on how my sources read, but I can't find a clarification.). I removed the section about the couple "selling the house" and removed the part about Minna moving in with "parents" in the Kiev area. Frankly, it's just easier to not have it then to worry about those details - my sources aren't providing me further details. Luckily, this isn't a major part of Nevelon's life story on a broad level. --SarahStierch (talk) 14:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "She graduated in 1918", Presumably that's graduation from high school? In the rest of the world you graduate from university, not school.✅


 * "She was introduced by Bernard to his brother and June 1920 the two were married". Which two? Louise and Bernard or Louise and Charles?✅


 * "... allowing Nevelson to finally escape Maine and also satisfy her parents hope that she would marry into a wealthy family.". I think that maybe "aspiration" might be a better word than "hope", but the lack of a possessive there obviously needs to be addressed.✅


 * "She would also become pregnant and in 1922 she gave birth to her son". Why the subjunctive "would also"? Why not the more straightforward "she became pregnant"? Similarly with "who would grow-up to be a sculptor". And why is "grow-up" hyphenated?✅


 * "While Nevelson studied art, Nevelson family would disapprove of her creative interests." Something seriously wrong with that sentence.✅


 * In the fourth paragraph, when talking about the wedding and subsequent events it's necessary to switch from calling her "Nevelson" (which she hadn't been called up to that point anyway) to Louise, to avoid any confusion with Charles, but then it looks a little odd to switch back to calling her "Nevelson", as in "Nevelson studied art ...". It's also a little jarring, as it's not immediately obvious which Nevelson is being referred to, Charles or Louise. I'm wondering whether the article ought not to consistently call her Louise?
 * After further examination and thought I don't feel comfortable calling her Louise in the article, and it's not best practice in most scholarly art historical writing. There is also this LASTNAME which has a few points to make. I don't think it's confusing and I went and changed it in her earlier life section. I should have done that earlier. SarahStierch (talk) 14:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Later career and life
 * "Designer Arnold Scaasi created a large portion of the clothing she wore." What does that mean? Many of the clothes she wore?✅


 * Public artworks
 * You have to provide a summary of the linked article, not just a link.✅
 * Just moved it down to "see also". The article talks about her public artwork, so no need for the section. SarahStierch (talk) 14:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Legacy
 * "These works were claimed to have been left to Nevelson's friend and assistant of 25-years, Diana MacKown. Documentation showed that Nevelson had gifted these works to MacKown, worth millions, yet Mike Nevelson claimed otherwise." This really seems to be saying the same thing twice. Perhaps the two sentences could be combined? Something like "Documentation showed that Nevelson had given these works, worth millions, to her friend and assistant of 25 years Diana MacKown, yet Mike Nevelson claimed otherwise."✅


 * "Proceedings began about the estate and will, which Mike Nevelson claimed MacKown was not written into." As she died more than 20 years ago surely this case has now been resolved?
 * I don't understand the legal jargon in the one PDF that I found. I didn't feel comfortable trying to break it down, and I don't have any close acquaintances that are lawyers. Here is the PDF, in case you're feeling bold :) SarahStierch (talk) 14:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, but I was under the impression that we weren't supposed to directly cite court opinions anyway, at least for claims about living people. Although the estate has surely been settled now, even if we could track down the stuff from the court about it, it would probably not be an appropriate way to source it. It wouldn't shock me if the eventual resolution of the estate was never reported in a non-primary RS, which would mean that we couldn't write about its resolution. (This PDF said nothing too interesting, or at least nothing too informative about the question.) Kevin (talk) 20:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * If the information isn't readily available then we'll just have to live with that. After all, it's only tangentially related to Nevelson's life and career. I suppose it might be an issue for FAC, but not for GAN I don't think. Malleus Fatuorum 21:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "... both Mike Nevelson and MacKown claimed no sexual relations between the two." What does that mean exactly? How do you claim sexual relations?✅


 * "Louise Nevelson Plaza, a sculpture garden on her behalf, is located in downtown New York City." What does "on her behalf" mean here?✅


 * Feminism and Nevelson's influence on feminist art
 * 1940s reviews of Nevelson's works wrote her off as just a "woman artist,"." Very odd punctuation there, and sentences ought not to start with numbers.✅


 * 1930s
 * "... she studied with Hans Hofmann and left when the Nazi's closed the school during occupation" I don't quite follow that. She was in Munich, which wasn't occupied by the Nazis as it was (and is) already in Germany. Also, the link takes the reader (eventually) to World War II, which I don't think is very helpful. Added to which the very next sentence tells us that she returned to New York in 1932, well before the outbreak of the war.✅
 * I just removed the part about the occupation and condensed her travel and her return to New York. SarahStierch (talk) 17:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "She met Diego Rivera in 1933, had an affair with him[2], also working as his occasional assistant on his mural Man at the Crossroads at Rockefeller Plaza." Strangely written and inconsistently punctuated.✅


 * Mid-career
 * "Nevelson also visited Latin America, finding heavy influence in Mayan ruins". That isn't right. She might have become heavily influenced, but influence doesn't have weight.✅


 * "The change in her sculptures scales ...". As written there's obviously an apostrophe missing to indicate the possessive, but I think rewriting as something like "The change in scale of her sculptures ...".✅


 * Later career and life
 * "Upon her first outdoor creations Nevelson stated: ...". So she was standing on them when she said this?✅


 * "... the evidence of Nevelson's "intuitive gesture" is not evident in the large steel works". There's clearly some redundancy there in saying that evidence isn't evident. Why not just "Nevelson's "intuitive gesture" is not evident in the large steel works"?✅


 * Style and works
 * "Nevelson described these immersive sculptures environments." Shouldn't that be "described these as"? But then that doesn't make sense in conjunction with "sculptures environments", which is not right in itself anyway.✅
 * Nevelson called them "environments," so I added the as and added quote around environments, I think it clarifies it a bit bitter. SarahStierch (talk) 17:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "In the 1960s she began incorporating white and gold into her works". We've already been told this, in the mid-career section.
 * Since this is the "style and works" section it's a nice place to summarize the artists "style and works," and it makes sense to touch on the use of these shades and colors in her work, again. There are times when readers might skip through her career and move directly to this section (I read like that at times on articles when seeking something specific), it also follows the tradition of art history publications - biography, followed by works/style - which often might repeat a few general things only to cover it in more detail in the works/style section. SarahStierch (talk) 17:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand you want to remind readers of her use of white and gold, but it could be done without repeating that she began using those colours in the 1960s.


 * Notes
 * The authors should be given either consistently first name, last name, or last name, first name.✅

OK, I think we can close this now. Thanks for patiently putting up with my no doubt at least occasionally irritating comments. Malleus Fatuorum 21:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)