Talk:Passing Mother's Grave/GA2

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

Reviewer: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 06:10, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I'll give this one a look over the next day or two. Looks to be in good shape! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 06:10, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * For my own reference, the previous GA review is here. This one is of course a clean slate, but I'll try to make sure that I don't miss any important matters raised by the previous reviewer.
 * First pass done. I'll let you respond to the below before I start filling in the "proper" template: there's a few important bits to take care of regarding images and spot-checks, and then most of the rest is advice related to the other criteria. Let me know if you think I've been unclear or unfair on anything. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 14:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

General

 * I think MOS:CAPS would have terms like realism in lower case except at the start of a sentence. There's some inconsistency within the article, too: realism and realist should be capitalised the same way. My impression from a (very cursory) read of academic sources is that Post-Impressionist tends to be capitalised, though. ✅
 * Dutch text, including titles of works, should be in templates so that screen readers can read it correctly, and the wiki software can correctly categorise the page. ✅ I think Bruxton (talk) 03:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Lead

 * I'd suggest formatting the opening words as follows: Passing Mother's Grave Langs Moeders Graf, also known as Passing the Churchyard. The present formatting implies that there are three different titles for it, where Langs Moeders Graf is simply the original Dutch from which Passing Mother's Grave is translated. ✅
 * By the Dutch Realist artist and a representative of the Hague School of painters Jozef Israëls should grammatically be something like by the Dutch realist artist and representative of the Hague School of painters Jozef Israëls, though I think it would read better with the name first: by Jozef Israëls, a Dutch realist artist and a representative of the Hague School of painters. ✅ Bruxton (talk) 03:09, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * gaining popularity through numerous print reproductions and several painted copies executed by the artist himself: did Israëls execute both the painted copies and the print reproductions? If not, suggest ...as well as several painted copies... ✅
 * Due to its focus on the Dutch working class, the painting has been compared to The Stone Breakers, a 1849 painting by the French realist painter Gustave Courbet;: perhaps rephrase to avoid giving the impression that The Stone Breakers also focuses on the Dutch working class. ✅
 * and is considered a prominent example of the Dutch realist movement in the second half of the 19th-century: suggest breaking this into a new sentence, as it doesn't follow from the first clause ("due to its focus on..."). ✅
 * 19th-century: only hyphenate if an adjective (e.g. 19th-century art). Generally, non-scientific writing would spell it out as the nineteenth century. ✅
 * Subject in the infobox refers more literally to who or what is being painted (e.g. if it's a portrait of a known person, place, battle...): a general theme like "grief" is a bit subjective and unverifiable for an encyclopaedia, particularly in an infobox, which is stripped back to the barest factual information. ✅ changed to peasants Bruxton (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Passing Mother's Grave is said to have influenced modern artists in the Netherlands, including the Post-Impressionist artist Vincent van Gogh who listed it among his favorite works: I've cut the word future here (which would imply that they haven't yet been born as of 2023). "Modern" is ambiguous given its technical meaning in art criticism: Van Gogh, for instance, is very rarely considered a "modern artist". If you're not trying to link it specifically to the "modern art" movement, you could try later artists in the Netherlands. ✅

History

 * * a work portraying scene from the life of Dutch King William the Silent: either a scene or scenes ✅
 * Israëls spent time in the fishing villages of Zandvoort and Katwijk where he observed the Dutch fishermen and their families: somewhat a matter of taste, but I'd put a comma before where in this and similar sentences. ✅
 * In 1856, Passing Mother's Grave became one of his first paintings in the peasant genre and "introduced into Dutch art a powerful variant of French Realism": the start reads slightly oddly (the use of "became" makes it sound as if the painting existed before 1856): I'd suggest Passing Mother's Grave, which Israëls completed in 1856, was.... Per WP:PLAGIARISM, the quotation should be attributed inline: the art historian Dieuwertje Dekkers has written that it ""introduced into Dutch art a powerful variant of French Realism", or similar. ✅
 * Israëls moved to Paris in 1945 and lived there until 1847, studying at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts under James Pradier, Horace Vernet and Paul Delaroche. In 1947: should these dates all be 18something? Also, named people like Pradier, Vernet etc. should generally be introduced briefly: perhaps the sculptor James Pradier and the painters Horace Vernet and Paul Delaroche. ✅
 * We still have him moving to Paris in 1945, leaving in 1847, and returning to Amsterdam in 1947. I'm assuming these should simply be 1845, 1847 and 1847, but don't want to make the change in case there's a bigger problem than a typo here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Definitely were typos. Corrected now. Bruxton (talk) 00:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Is the peasant genre a widely-used term? It sounds a little WP:JARGONy to me.✅
 * The replacement In fishing villages, he became acquainted with the daily lives of the working class. seems to restate the sentence before, and is a little woolly (you might say that it states the strikingly obvious): I'd suggest cutting it. ✅

Analysis

 * The man is a fisherman: this is a bit more Watsonian language than we tend to use when writing about art, and perhaps very minor MOS:FICTION here. The man is, strictly speaking, no more than a set of brush-strokes on canvas. Suggest the widower is portrayed wearing [whatever], a traditional fisherman's outfit or similar, which would also help the reader reconstruct why we're judging that he's portrayed as a fisherman. ✅
 * The painting was an attempt by Israëls to move from his traditional subject matter of historical paintings, toward contemporary portrayals of peasant life: I'd bin the comma here. What does contemporary mean in this context: should it be {[tq|portrayals of contemporary peasant life}}? ✅
 * nearly grey-brown: does this mean a brown that's nearly grey? As currently phrased, it suggests that the painting isn't, but almost is, grey-brown in colour. ✅ with the exception of the spelling for color. Bruxton (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * the models which Israëls used for the image were Klaas Helweg and the two children of Hendrik Helweg: if this is all we know about the Helwegs, suggest were named Klaas.... ❌
 * The solution you've gone for works fine.
 * Dutch poet Nicolaas Beets is credited for naming the image "Passing Mother's Grave" in 1861.: Dutch poet here is a false title; suggest The Dutch poet.MOS:WORDSASWORDS would advise is credited with naming the image Passing Mother's Grave. ✅ called him a writer and used the word "with" Bruxton (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Pace the Open Library, Mondrian (who died in 1944) wasn't the author of Mondriaan and the Hague school: it's published under the name of the Whitworth Art Gallery (who organised the 1980 exhibition of the same name). ✅ Bruxton (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Reception

 * On the new Vector skin, there's the tiniest amount of MOS:SANDWICH at the top of this section. Not a huge problem, but it would be solved by moving the images to the right, which is the default place for them and generally helps accessibility. I see the point that both images "face" right, however, so this one's very much optional. ✅ they look good at the right. Bruxton (talk) 16:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Haaretz gives the source of "a monumental treatment of the commonplace" as Sheila Samuels, not Sheila D. Mueller. Are they the same person and, if so, are we using their current name? ✅ not sure what happened there with the name art historian Sheila Samuels. Bruxton (talk) 16:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hendrik Enno van Gelder (H.E. van Gelder): the pipe trick is helpful here: H.E. van Gelder or Hendrik Enno (H.E.) van Gelder As before, introduce van Gelder briefly. ✅
 * For instance, Artists: decapitalise. ✅
 * he thought that the sentiment of the painting was "cheap...": could be more briefly stated as "he thought the sentiment of the painting "cheap..."}}, if you like. ✅
 * Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh counted: suggest The Dutch painter (false title). ✅
 * compared it to the work of French painter Eugène Delacroix saying that he was taken in by the 'Delacroix-like technique: punctuation: compared it to the work of French painter Eugène Delacroix, saying that he was taken in by the "Delacroix-like technique". ✅
 * There's a rogue space between footnotes 18 and 17. ✅
 * In 2008 another copy of the painting, titled Passing Mother's Tomb, sold at Lempertz auction house in Cologne, Germany. The painting which was listed as an Israels painting 94 cm (37 in) x 71.5 cm (28.1 in) realized a sale price of €19200: punctuation: try In 2008, another copy of the painting, titled Passing Mother's Tomb, sold at Lempertz auction house in Cologne, Germany. The painting was listed as an Israels painting measuring 94 cm (37 in) x 71.5 cm (28.1 in) and realized a sale price of €19,200. ✅ Bruxton (talk) 16:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Images

 * File:Abraham Hesselink Jozef Israels.jpg is fine now (I added, which is necessary to show that the statue, as well as the photograph, is in the public domain in the United States).
 * File:Gustave Courbet - The Stonebreakers - WGA05457.jpg: needs a US PD tag. ✅ I added to the image

History

 * We've got a short biography of Israëls here: the article seems to imply that his education was entirely at the Minerva Academy and in Paris; I think Kruseman, Pieneman and the Rijksacademie need a mention. His travels after Paris could also do with some space. I appreciate that this is an article about the painting, not the artist, but if we're going to have what looks like a potted history of his career, it shouldn't have major omissions. ❌
 * To be clear, do you mean that you haven't got to this one yet, or that you don't think it should be done? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This will take some research so I did not get to it yet. Bruxton (talk) 00:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not sure how important it is to the understanding of this painting for a deep dive into the biography of Israëls. Did you want more cursory information about his training or brief mentions? Of should I remove the Israëls biography altogether?
 * I think the present approach is a good one – to give a full biography of Israëls, but make it (as here) very blow-by-blow. We just need to make sure that it doesn't give any false impressions (e.g. that he moved straight from the Minerva Academy to Paris, or straight from Paris to Amsterdam) or leave out anything major. If you're really concerned that doing so would over-bloat the article, another way to do it would be to start in medias res, and tell the story from around 1853: you would then be explaining the genesis of Passing Mother's Grave via Israëls's move into historical paintings, the bad reception to William the Silent, and his reaction to that from 1855 onwards. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I added to his biography and studies, i am not sure we should go further. Bruxton (talk) 17:46, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

* I am a little concerned that I can find no reference to William of Orange in Council with Regent Margaret of Parma anywhere online or in Google Books. Is it perhaps more commonly known under a different title? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I was unfamiliar with this sentence, I see it was added by Ppt91, I have no access to the source which was used here. Bruxton (talk) 00:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * any chance you could shed some light on this painting? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bruxton @UndercoverClassicist happy to see this article being reviewed and in great shape! The work was mentioned in an entry on the artist in Grove Art Online (https://doi.org/10.1093/oao/9781884446054.013.90000370476) I am not sure Wikipedia Library has access to Grove, but I believe the article references this painting: https://www.alamy.com/israels-jozef-willem-van-oranje-in-de-raad-bij-landvoogdes-margaretha-van-parma-image213531996.html (the best quality reproduction in color I was able to find). It is supposed to be in the collection of the Amsterdam Museum (formerly Amsterdam Historical Museum), though I was unable to find information to confirm this on the museum's website. Let me know if I there is anything else I might be able to help with!  Ppt91    talk   19:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks - at least it's definitely real! I did poke around a bit with the Dutch title, but there doesn't seem to be a page on their Wikipedia for it, so I think we've done all we can here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for reviewing this article. It is certainly a better article now. Bruxton (talk) 19:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually, User:Ppt91: could I trouble you for a wikimail of the Dekkers article? The bit of Israels' biography cited to it in this article seems a little at odds with that in Muller (we've presented Paris as his 'base' between 1845 and 1847, while in Muller it seems to be one of many fairly transient stops between 1845 and 1855), and it would be useful to see both to work out if there's a way to deconflict them. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @UndercoverClassicist Sorry about my delay. I just sent it over!  Ppt91    talk   18:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Got it - thanks. It does seem that the two accounts are slightly different: I'll have a read and a think and suggest a way of disentangling the two. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:23, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm happy with what we've got here. It could be framed in a different way, but it's an acceptable balance to strike between comprehensiveness (not strictly required by GA standards) and brevity. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Analysis

 * The painting in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam: this sounds like elegant variation, but we learn later that there are multiple versions of the painting, which presumably might have different dimensions. I'd suggest bringing the material about different versions up (here and in the infobox) and then going with something like the version of the painting in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam... ✅
 * It is a portrayal of a widower walking past the grave of his wife, with his young children: more comma pedantry, but I would not use one here, since with his three young children isn't really a substantial subordinate clause, whereas e.g. where he observed the Dutch fishermen and their families is. Again a matter of taste, but the article should pick a system for when to use or not use the comma. ✅
 * It is a portrayal of a widower walking past the grave of his wife with his young children. The three people in the image are all barefoot. The widower is portrayed wearing as a fisherman and he is holding a boy's hand and carrying a baby as he passes the headstone of his deceased wife.: the first and third sentences here seem to be doing the same job, and the overall effect is quite repetitive; I'd suggest thinking about which key ideas you want to convey, and in which order, and then condensing this down into two sentences. The third sentence also has some grammatical issues as it stands.UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC) ✅
 * The painting was purchased by the Amsterdam Academy of Fine Arts: presumably this refers to one specific version of it? Is this the same one that we saw earlier in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam? ✅ The original was purchased according to the news article. After that the provenance is not clear because of other versions. Bruxton (talk) 00:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Reception

 * a statue erected in honor of Israëls: I'd suggest naming this statue in the text as well as the picture caption. More subjectively, suggest a statue in honor...: it's generally good style to omit needless words.✅
 * I've made a slightly bold edit here for grammar, prose and clarity: please feel free to tweak. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Prior to genre painting, Israëls had been copying the Renaissance and Baroque masters. He also studied German Romanticism.: I see what this is doing here (explaining van Gelder's term "second phase"): perhaps better integrated as e.g. ...the obvious beginning of the second period of Israëls's development", in which he moved away from his previous interests in German Romanticism and copying the Renaissance and Baroque masters. Is "copying" quite the right word here, or would something like "emulating" be more appropriate? ✅ changed the wording slightly. Bruxton (talk) 14:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The painting gained popularity due to being frequently reproduced in print: seems to be selling it a little short (presumably, it was frequently reproduced because it was already popular, or at least had some artistic quality that made it popula once more people had seen it). Could do something like the painting gained popularity and was widely reproduced in print? ✅ changed the lead to match as well. Bruxton (talk) 14:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Images

 * Not strictly required for GA, but important for accessibility: suggest adding alt text to images.

References, plagiarism, WP:TSI and WP:CLOP

 * Run through Earwig, no cause for concern (some similarity with Haaretz, but that's down to the two articles using the same secondary quotes).
 * Reference 2: this is advisory, since the GA standards for reference format are almost microscopically small, but I'd strongly suggest separating this out so that it's clear when p16 is being cited vs. p195. ✅ only page 195 was used. The editor of the encyclopaedia should certainly be named in the reference.✅ Likewise ref. 7.One sentence is referenced to this source so I am sure it is not 4 pages. I am unable to access this reference to pin down the page number and I imagine the painting was mentioned on each of the pages, if you can access it - it would be a help, I am not able to.
 * Will have a look (you just need a free archive.org membership). UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Ok I checked it out and it was p 61 for ref 7, so I changed the reference. Bruxton (talk) 14:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Given that we're referring to a lot of sources, sometimes multiple times, I think SFN templates and a bibliography would be much clearer. Wikipedia makes this totally a matter of editorial taste, but using ref tags gets cumbersome and confusing quickly as the article grows, particularly when different pages of the same source need to be cited in different places. Seems like a good idea, I am not familiar with the citation style.
 * I'm happy to just go in and do it, but it might be wise to wait until after this process is concluded, so that we're not changing the citation style while also making very frequent changes.
 * Capitalisation: again, not strictly required for GA, but it would be good to have consistency as to whether titles of works go in title case (which is the norm) or sentence case.
 * Is there a reason for giving both Smart History and Smarthistory as the name of the same website? changed to Smarthistory
 * I don't really see what reference 15 (the Hartington Herald is supporting in the text. There are, however, some great quotes to pull out of that article.
 * Up to you: if you make use of it, cite it: otherwise, it seems to be an empty citation (nothing in the article is supported by it) that should be removed. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I used it in the artist bio Bruxton (talk) 00:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Spot checks

 * I've checked note 2, but I don't see that it supports the assertion in the lead that the link between this painting and The Stone Breakers is a matter of their mutual focus on the working class: the source seems to be saying that both were similar in impact. This statement also seems to have changed significantly between article text and lead: MOS:LEAD would encourage that nothing is said in the lead that isn't also in the body. I matched the lead with the body regarding Stonebreakers and its impact
 * 2c checks out.
 * I'm not sure that 2d (Prior to genre painting, Israëls had been copying the Renaissance and Baroque masters quite tracks: the article seems to have compressed quite a lot of time implied in the source, and makes this sound like a single-stage shift in a way that the source doesn't necessarily support. I added "He also studied German Romanticism". I think that covers the information in the source
 * Could you please provide a brief quotation from the original source to support the following citations:
 * 1: In fishing villages, he became acquainted with the daily lives of the working class. In 1856, Passing Mother's Grave became one of his first paintings in the peasant genre and "introduced into Dutch art a powerful variant of French Realism" (Dekkers 2003) This is from a source that I have no access to and I suspect it was added by the previous reviewer. Bruxton (talk) 01:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 8a: The color of the painting is nearly grey-brown and almost monochrome (Novotny 1960, p. 170) ✅
 * 17a: Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh counted the painting among his favorites. He was fascinated by the painting and compared it to the work of French painter Eugène Delacroix saying that he was taken in by the 'Delacroix-like technique (Leeuw - which should be de Leeuw, I think - 1997, p. 100) It was page 189 and I used the quote "Delacroix-like and superb’ in its technique"
 * Perhaps I wasn't clear: I'm asking you to WP:VERIFY that the sources support this information by quoting, here, what they actually say. A sentence or two is fine. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * "Mother's Grave ( 1856 ) - was Van Gogh's favourite painting . He was particularly enamoured of its 'Delacroix - like' technique". There are more sources for the quote if needed. Bruxton (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Is there one with "Delecroix-like and superb"? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:12, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * In this source the quote is attributed to van Gogh with the word superb. He refers to the painting as Zandvoort fisherman. I am getting betty from the sources, but last night I found the exact quote "Delacroix-like and superb’ in its technique". So will have to remember where I found it. Bruxton (talk) 16:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Batty...but I found it, "Passing Mother’s Grave on Johan’s wife. ‘There were tears in her eyes — ISRAELS! you have scored a veritable triumph . Yet Johan accused Israels of ‘super¬ ficiality in some parts of his painting, the negligence in the drawing here and there’. Vincent van Gogh, who called the picture ‘Delacroix-like and superb’ in its technique, countered this accusation some 30 years later in a letter to his brother Theo. ‘Let them jabber about technique as much as they like, in Pharisaical, hollow, hypocritical terms - the true painters are guided by that conscience which is called sentiment, their soul : their brains aren’t subject to the brush, but the brush to their brains’ (no. 426, Oct. 1885)." I will add the reference. Bruxton (talk) 17:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Review template
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, 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):
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * A well-crafted article, and it's good to see it come back having taken on much from the first review. Beyond the GA criteria, improvements could be made in terms of comprehensiveness: there is an extensive Dutch bibliography on the topic (on which see the Dekkers article cited) which a suitably-equipped editor could make good use of. However, I'm satisfied that the GA criteria are currently met: congratulations to User:Bruxton and my thanks to User:Ppt91 for their assistance with this review. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 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 non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * A well-crafted article, and it's good to see it come back having taken on much from the first review. Beyond the GA criteria, improvements could be made in terms of comprehensiveness: there is an extensive Dutch bibliography on the topic (on which see the Dekkers article cited) which a suitably-equipped editor could make good use of. However, I'm satisfied that the GA criteria are currently met: congratulations to User:Bruxton and my thanks to User:Ppt91 for their assistance with this review. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * A well-crafted article, and it's good to see it come back having taken on much from the first review. Beyond the GA criteria, improvements could be made in terms of comprehensiveness: there is an extensive Dutch bibliography on the topic (on which see the Dekkers article cited) which a suitably-equipped editor could make good use of. However, I'm satisfied that the GA criteria are currently met: congratulations to User:Bruxton and my thanks to User:Ppt91 for their assistance with this review. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * A well-crafted article, and it's good to see it come back having taken on much from the first review. Beyond the GA criteria, improvements could be made in terms of comprehensiveness: there is an extensive Dutch bibliography on the topic (on which see the Dekkers article cited) which a suitably-equipped editor could make good use of. However, I'm satisfied that the GA criteria are currently met: congratulations to User:Bruxton and my thanks to User:Ppt91 for their assistance with this review. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Pass/fail:
 * A well-crafted article, and it's good to see it come back having taken on much from the first review. Beyond the GA criteria, improvements could be made in terms of comprehensiveness: there is an extensive Dutch bibliography on the topic (on which see the Dekkers article cited) which a suitably-equipped editor could make good use of. However, I'm satisfied that the GA criteria are currently met: congratulations to User:Bruxton and my thanks to User:Ppt91 for their assistance with this review. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)