Talk:Virgin and Child (Sirani)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Supraios (talk · contribs) 19:10, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I will review this article after I have already done some tweakings here an there. Please refer to "View history" on the article page for my latest edits. I propose we divide this article into: 1. Description 2. Context and Interpretation 3. Legacy. We will need proper sources (not from the internet, but printed sources by art historians.) Believe me, there is plenty of serious literature on Sirani. I have already discussed 4 issues of the article on the former talk page which you find below: --19:10, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

asquadretti da letto
Hi all,

in the article it says: "These types are called asquadretti da letto, which translates to "for personal prayer"; they were bought by the wealthy for personal devotion, normally at home." I´m afraid asquadretto (singular of asquadretti) does not exist in Italian and "da letto" means "in bed". Please provide sources or remove this part — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supraios (talk • contribs) 14:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Style
The article mentions Sirani and the pronoun "her" quite a bit. This is rather redundant as we all know since the intro it was Sirani who painted the picture. E.g.: Instead of "Sirani's plain dark background..." I would just write "The plain dark background..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supraios (talk • contribs) 14:23, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Let´s redo this article
I have started with a proper description. The description needs to be amended with details.

I will provide scientific sources for the article. Everyone who has contributed to this article, please refer to my criticism under "view history". I know, its harsh, but I´ve studied art history and it causes me pain to read what I´ve read.

Please come up with proper sources if you think I was in the wrong when deleting your contributions. Supraios (talk) 18:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for Quickfail agreement
Agreement with User:Johnbod on his Talk page that this article is not in readiness for GA review and that it should be Quickfailed. There is no progress in improvements to article, and this review page appears to be neglected. Do not renominate this article until it reaches "B"-class in assessment on the article's Talk page. Article in its current condition is Quickfailed. CodexJustin (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)