Template:Did you know nominations/Engagement Ring (Roy Lichtenstein)

Engagement Ring (Roy Lichtenstein)
Created/expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nom at 20:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ... that Roy Lichtenstein's Engagement Ring marks his transition from his prior painterly work to his subsequent more polished mechanical-looking work?


 * 1st of 2 QPQs against Template:Did you know nominations/Stafanie Taylor--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Length and newness is fine. It is classed as a stub. I don't think you get 2 self noms for Template:Did you know nominations/Stafanie Taylor unless I'm not understanding the QPQ rule. I can't find the hook in the article! The nearest I can find is: "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." I accept I'm no art historian however.. Secretlondon (talk) 00:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes the sentence "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is what this hook is about. Do I need to change the hook?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Previous reviewer handled QPQ, newness and length. Both images have fair use rationales. Article is completely supported by inline citations.
 * Pictogram voting keep.svg Book sources support text and were not plagiarised writing the article.
 * Pictogram voting keep.svg I see the previous reviewers comments. I think they are valid to a degree.  The text is not directly supporting this in a blinkingly obvious kind of way. "The general "rawness" of the work links it to Lichtenstein's work from the 1950s, while its "integrated formality" links it to his subsequent works." is the sentence but is it requires reader interpretation to get to the fact. I'm inclined to let this slide. --LauraHale (talk) 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Good to go if mover is confident in my thinking. :) --LauraHale (talk) 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)