Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Danie Mellor/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 16:01, 3 January 2013.

Danie Mellor

 * Nominator(s): hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Introducing Danie Mellor: a red-headed, fair-skinned, university educated Indigenous Australian artist, whose mixed heritage and identity highlight how contemporary Indigenous Australian art is rooted not in skin colour, geography, or even in socio-economic marginalisation, but is grounded in the exploration of identity and in the communication of Indigenous culture and experience. Plus he makes sculptures using artificial eyeballs and dead animal parts. What's not to like? hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * FN13: page formatting
 * done.


 * FN10: caps
 * done.


 * FN21, 31, 38, 39: page?
 * IIRC I aaccessed these through a database that did not store page numbers, so I don't have them. Will see if there's anything I can do...
 * Sorted. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Single pages should be notated using "p.", multiple with "pp."
 * done.


 * FN37: why specify "undated" here but not elsewhere?
 * no good reason. removed.


 * FN41: formatting
 * There was a stray character, but in other respects I think this formatting is correct, in that "nreta museums > exhibitions > natsiaa >" is the title of the work (that is, it is the general area of the website within which this particular work is located). I'm open to other suggestions on how to address this.


 * West Australian or The West Australian? Sydney Morning Herald or The Sydney Morning Herald?
 * Actually, they turned out to be the tip of the iceberg of my dodgy publication titles. Hope i've now caught all of these.


 * Be consistent in what is wikilinked when. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Have had a go at all of the above, other than the pagination of articles 21, 31, 38, 39, per the note . Thank you Nikki. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:29, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments Drive by   Jimfbleak  -  talk to me?  19:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I can see why Aboriginal, despite being just an a adjective, might be capitalised in an Australian context. Why is "indigenous", another adjective, also capitalised?
 * It is the convention to capitalise Indigenous in Australia, where it refers to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. See for example this NSW government guide and this one from Queensland. The same principle is followed in Canada.
 * What does "highly commented" mean? I assume it's a typo for "highly commended"?
 * Genuine stuff up. Fixed.
 * What on earth is Cyanthea cooperi? I suspect it's another typo for Cyathea cooperi, gives little incentive to read beyond the lead.
 * I suspect you are correct, however the source archived here, which was the official exhibition document, uses the spelling that I have used in the article. I can't rule out the possibility that the artist wanted it spelt that way for some reason.
 * Sorry if my early errors put you off, but I promise only one of the three is a genuine mistake! See comments above. Hope you will consider continuing. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I can forgive one typo (: Nevertheless, the painting title is wrong. Search Google for "Danie Mellor cyanthea cooperi" (ie incorrect spelling) and you get "Showing results for Danie Mellor Cyathea cooperi" with a list of reputable sites. Force the search for your spelling and you get er... mainly your article and clones thereof. Also see the NGA collection. I can seen why this arose, people expect an "n" after "cya-", a bit like the common mispelling of barbecue with a "q". Your suggestion that the artist deliberately misspelled is implausible and OR unless you can support it. You could contact his agent if you're still unconvinced. I'll do a proper review later.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  08:23, 16 November 2012 (UTC):
 * Fair point, and I've identified another official source with correct spelling, in my own collection. Changed.
 * I think it would be nice to have a mention and link to the plant (Cyathea cooperi), the binomial won't mean much to most people.
 * Done. You will see i didn't link the binomial directly, as I did not want people to think it would take them to an article about the picture carrying that title.
 * printmaking, drawing, painting, and sculpture. — As a Brit, I'd omit the last comma, although I know it's standard in AE. Is OzE practice the same as AE?
 * I think there was going to be another word there, and then there wasn't. Removed.
 * Mellor lived in Mackay, Scotland, Brisbane, Sutton Grange — "Scotland" is a bit vague, to say the least
 * I know, but it's all that I've found so far.
 *  a painter's model — in BE, "artist's model" would be more usual and would remove a repetition, don't know about Oz (despite having seen Sirens)
 * Indeed. Changed.
 * These works have included the work — falls some way short of "engaging prose"
 * Putting it mildly. Changed.
 * link "diorama"
 * Done.
 * mixed-media tree overhead.[6][21][22][21] — notice anything odd about the ref numbers?
 * Yes. That I can't count. Fixed.
 * signifying how under the black armband view of history regime, the oral history accounts of Indigenous...  — could you check this, if it's accurately quoted, so be it, but either "view" or "regime" seem redundant to me.
 * It is accurately quoted, but I agree that "regime" in this context is unhelpful, and I've actually replaced it with an ellipsis.
 * 26th Telstra national Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander (ref 42) — capitalisation inconsistent with previous
 * Fixed. There are some variations in the exhibition title and publisher over the years. I think most of these are legit, but will keep an eye out as I check other things.
 * The general tone seems a bit hagiographic to me. No hint of adverse criticism. What about "Bolt accused artist Danie Mellor, a ‘white university lecturer, with his nice Canberra studio’ of pushing aside ‘real draw-in-the-dirt Aboriginal artists’, seeming to imply that since Mellor neither draws in the dirt nor lives in it, he therefore has no right to enter competitions for indigenous artists." from here I don't know if this source is RS, but it refers to a court case, so it should be verifiable. Also things like this. I get little sense of the controversy about his "blackness" from your article
 * I had overlooked the fact that Mellor was one of the infamous Mr Bolt's targets. Bolt's views are tricky as they are widely published but, amongst professionals and academics, definitely fringe. He also lost a court case over his comments about 'light skinned' Aboriginal people, in part because the court found his facts to be wrong in important respects, and his checking of them to be sadly lacking. The first note in the article is intended to deal with general queries about Aboriginality, and was text that I developed after questions were raised at the talk page of Bronwyn Bancroft. I can see that may not deal sufficiently with Bolt's prominent accusation against Mellor, though the point it makes rebuts Bolt's main complaint. Bolt also is not a reliable source with respect to art. But I'm going to ponder this some more. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I assumed you would avoid the direct link to the tree fern, and your solution works well. I'll leave the Bolt issue with you, and trust your judgement. Although we had a bit of a rocky start, I enjoyed this article, and I've indicated my support above. Good luck,  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  13:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jim. I'm still pondering the Bolt thing and have a short para in mind, but a bit stretched for time just now...hamiltonstone (talk) 13:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * For your information or that of other editors, I clenched my teeth and added this paragraph. I admit that the article is probably better for it.hamiltonstone (talk) 12:30, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments, leaning support : Another interesting article on a subject where everything I know comes from this author! A few little nit-picks, but nothing major. I think we get a good picture of him here. Happy to support when these points are replied to. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "He works in different media including printmaking, drawing, painting, and sculpture. The dominant theme in Mellor's art is the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian cultures. Paintings, drawings and sculptures by Mellor ": Minor point, but there is repetition here of painting, drawing and sculpture; given the length of the phrase, it is slightly jarring, even across a paragraph break. Also, why does the first instance have a comma before "and" when the second does not.
 * Done.


 * "in 2000, 2001, and every year from 2003 to 2010": Is there a less cumbersome way to phrase this: it effectively means every year except 2002, and I wonder could this be said using less years.
 * Revised.


 * "was awarded a 'highly commended'": Any particular reason for single quotation marks?
 * No. :-)


 * "he was awarded a 'highly commended', for his print Cyathea cooperi, while in 2009 he won the principal prize": Not sure about "while" in this sense. Maybe just "and" would be better.
 * Done.


 * "Other major exhibitions have included the Primavera 2005 show at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney, and the National Indigenous Art Triennial at the National Gallery of Australia in 2007.": Worth beginning this sentence with "his"?
 * Done.


 * Do we know why the family moved around so much? It is a little jarring when they suddenly have lived in Scotland with no reason given!
 * I have the vaguest of memories that they were teachers, but that doesn't explain it and no, don't remember any account for this.


 * Anything else about his immediate family? We learn that his mother taught him, but nothing else.
 * No, nothing. Just that stuff about his more distant ancestry.


 * "He was included in Primavera 2005…": As the start of a paragraph, this really should begin "Mellor…"
 * Rewrote, to avoid beginning yet another para with "Mellor".


 * "with the elaborate (and elaborately named) sculpture…": Editorial judgement?
 * That the sculpture is "elaborate" is per sources; that the name is elaborate, well yes, but can't imagine it being contradicted, and was trying to use engaging prose to foreshadow that what was to follow was not some bizarre formatting error.


 * My only other complaint is that parts of the article become slightly list, with names of works and dates, but I suspect there is no real way around this, so feel free to ignore.
 * There's quite a bit on the themes of his work, but maybe less on his technique. Some of this section is, while interesting, a little abstract. From a non-artist viewpoint, it may be nice to know what sort of things he actually does! Rather than giving specific examples from his work, is there anything generic that can be added on his style?
 * Also in this section, are there any critics who simply say "he is bloody good"? Or even the opposite? Everything so far is (I think) either on a specific work/exhibition. Perhaps just a little overall judgement or summary of how he is rated as an artist. But I understand that this may not be possible.
 * Look, both your preceding points are good ones, but it is a bit of a struggle. Part of the problem is that, as an artist still relatively early in his career, there haven't been any broad-brush overviews or retrospectives of his career. The second iss ue I think might be because of the diverse media he works with. I suspect reviewers may choose not to generalise across mezzotint / drawing / assembled objects sculpture / metalwork sculpture. So, although we have the overall theme of cultural interaction / history, there's not a lot more concrete to offer. The most likely source (and one I've not in fact used), is the one-page essay on Mellor in the 2007 "Culture Warriors" catalogue, but apart from drawing attention to Mellor's frequent portrayal of kangaroos (which hardly seems germane), it didn't really add anything to what's already here. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Last point: There are a few refs mid-sentence with no punctuation near them. While this is fine, I always think it looks untidy, but feel free to ignore this one completely. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * On the last pt, I rationalised a couple of cases, such as where it would be self-evident which source was responsible for which fact. The one such note I want left exactly where it is is "notes 1" in the lede, following my experience with Bronwyn Bancroft at TFA, where the talk page attracted all sorts of people asking questions about how come she's an Aboriginal artist when her skin isn't black / she had a white ancestor / blah blah. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Support: My education in Indigenous Australian art continues! Another great little article, and I'm more than happy with the changes and responses above. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments – Only found a couple of minor nit-picks to report; otherwise this is in very good shape
 * ANU is abbreviated in Artistic career, but not in the lead or in its first body use in Life. It's not likely that this particular abbreviation will cause any confusion, but I'd still feel better if the abbreviation could be worked in somewhere in parentheses; doing it in the lead should be enough.
 * The "These works have included..." sentence comes after a sentence on a 2003 work, so the logical order seems off. To maintain the chronological order that seems to be desired, you could try starting it with "His other works have included..." or similar. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 03:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Giants. Have addressed both of these, in the latter case switching to "Subsequent entries..." (ie. entries in that competition). Hope this clarifies. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support – Now that the two issues above are resolved, I'm happy to support. This is a charming article which is not that long but manages to meet all of the FA requirements. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 02:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Delegate note -- Almost there, but we could reduce the sea of blue in the first paragraph, and elsewhere; countries don't generally need to be linked, and I think most of the readers would get drawing, painting and sculpture without pointers (maybe not printmaking, I grant you). In the first para under Life, I wouldn't equate Cape Town with Sutton Grange, i.e. "in South Africa" seems redundant. Lastly, best to avoid starting sentences with "However" if possible... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:01, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Not involved, but I think that it's appropriate to link Scotland in the "Life" section, as it's among cities. There could very well be a town named Scotland, so it helps add clarity by linking to the article. I think I've reduced the link clutter enough. Everything seems fine to me.  ceran  thor 01:33, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, tks for stopping by. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:09, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * thank you both for your assistance! hamiltonstone (talk) 12:01, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Q: Should "Indigenous" be capatilised as it is in the lead? Also, I dont buy "There could very well be a town named Scotland". But thats a small thing though. Ceoil (talk) 18:04, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * On capitalisation, see previous response. On Scotland, someone else obviously agreed and de-linked it. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment From a first read through, the interesting bits seemed buried in lists of student prizes, later competitions and so on. He did this and then he did that. I'd be in favour of trimming the article, which might make it short, but a better and more focused read. I think you have the guts of an FA; the research and writing are commendable, but its not quite there yet. Can I make suggestions?Ceoil (talk) 18:28, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments from Cryptic C62:


 * The first sentence should include a pronunciation guide for the subject's name, if available.
 * Although I know the correct pronunciation, i don't have a source for it. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The first paragraph of the lead can't seem to decide whether or not to use "the" when introducing a school.
 * Common practice is to refer to "the" ANU. In other respects, you are correct, and there was also an inconsistency between lede and body text. I have sought to correct this. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Art works by Mellor have been included in National Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Art Award exhibitions every year from 2000 to 2010, except 2002" This level of factoid detail is not necessary in the lead, and it leaves the reader wondering "What about 2011 and 2012?". I suggest something like "Since 2000, Mellor's works have been included in several National Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Art Award exhibitions."
 * Changed.hamiltonstone (talk) 09:54, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "The family was peripatetic" What does this word mean? A wikilink or wiktionary link would be helpful.
 * wiktionary link added. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:54, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "in high school he was taught art by his mother." Was his mother a high school art teacher? Or did she just teach him art while he happened to be in high school?
 * It doesn't seem there is any ambiguity: it occurred "in" high school. How could she not be a high school art teacher? hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, she could be an artist herself who taught her son outside of school. If she was an art teacher at a high school, there is still some ambiguity as to where this happened, considering he lived in more places as a youngster than he had toes. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I had thought that "in" high school would be taken literally: to mean the teaching took place in the high school building, and therefore she was a teacher. The words in the source are (Mellor responding to an interviewer): "my mother (she taught me art at high school)...". Any alternate suggestions? hamiltonstone (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think at the very least this should mention which high school it is referring to. Otherwise the reader is just left guessing. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand your request, but the sentence fragment that I quoted is all the information available. The source doesn't state what school. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * "there are comparable elements and themes inherent in his philosophical narrative..." Who does "his" refer to? Steiner or Mellor?
 * Steiner. Clarified. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:08, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Mellor worked as an artist's model as well as a painter:" It's not clear to me why this belongs in Life and not Career. Perhaps "painters" means "house painter" or some similarly non-artistic endeavor? Also, try to avoid one-sentence paragraphs such as this one.
 * Your doubts may be a consequence of a recent edit I have reverted. He did not "work" as a model (at least, the sources do not say so). Rather, Paul Ryan wanted Mellor to sit for him. Subjects for the archibald portraits are often well-known people and I doubt any of them are "working" as models, but are being asked to sit as a subject of interest to the painter. Thus it was related to Mellor's life more than his professional career (I thought). If you're still not convinced, let me know. I always avoid one-sentence paras where possible. In this case, i thought it sat nicely on its own and was unrelated to other subject matter. If you have an alternate formulation you think is better, happy to see it revised. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Were there any other notable instances of Mellor modelling for painters? If so, they could be added to this paragraph to beef it up. If not, that may be an indication that the matter need not be mentioned at all. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * None I know of. The Archibald is Australia's most prominent art exhibition / competition. I'd probably be reluctant to not mention at all his appearance as a subject. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hrm. Upon rereading your earlier comment, it seems as though the only reason that Paul Ryan wanted to paint Mellor was because of his own artistic successes, yes? If that's the case, then I believe it would be appropriate to lump this sentence into the chronologically appropriate place in Career. No, it wasn't "work", but if he was asked to model as a result of his career, I think it makes sense to put it there. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * have relocated it and reworked it. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * "while a studying in Canberra and Birmingham" Jar Jar Binks, is that you? This should presumably read "while studying in" or "while a student at".
 * Yeah, I've reverted Jar Jar's little contribution. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "with the elaborate (and elaborately named) sculpture" Funny, but not encyclopedic. On a related note, I suggest cutting out the parenthetical parts of the names of his works. They pad out the prose in a way that makes it more difficult to follow what is being said.
 * I'm not seeing why this is not encyclopedic. It is accurate, and designed to keep the prose interesting - an issue (see reviewer comment above) in this slightly list-y article. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't respond to your other point. Although parenthetical, they are parts of the full title of the work. I think it would unusual and unwise in an encyclopedia article to not refer even once to the work's full title. This is particularly relevant as the artist appears to be using the titles as part of the work (i don't have a reference for that specific to Mellor; it is more a comment about how art work titles conferred by the artist him or herself are generally regarded). I agree it reduces readability, I just don't agree that something should be changed as a result. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "He has harnessed a wide range of media during his career" I don't think that "harnessed" is the right word here, as its intended meaning is not clear to me. Perhaps "mastered" or "employed"?
 * Harnessed seems normal everyday English to me, so I'm a bit bemused. "Mastered" would imply a value judgement that the article does not seek to make. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I looked up the definition of "harness", which Merriam-Webster gives as "to put into action or service". This is clearly the correct usage of the term, and I am clearly an uneducated wombat disguised as an editor. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * A wombat! You have a remarkable ability to work a keyboard with those big feet. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I am of the opinion that the last paragraph of Technique and Themes should be split into a separate section. Dopey white folks babbling about Mellor's race is not in any way relevant to his technique.
 * See your point. Will think about this some more. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Not sure. The para beings and ends by talking about identity issues as matters of the theme of Mellor's work, and discusses the Bolt incident in that context. I also don't want to give it the prominence that inevitably comes with having its own subeading. Any further thoughts? hamiltonstone (talk) 10:22, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that giving it a main heading would be a bit too much. This is a tricky problem to deal with, as the paragraph is relevant to his life, career, and themes; the question is which of those does it most directly relate to? I would argue that Career would be most appropriate for the following reason: Career is about the artist, while Technique and themes is about the art, and it is the artist's identity that is being questioned by the critics. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

-- Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. Working on it. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Image review -- We seem to have neglected this till now but both images appear suitably licensed. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC) Closing note -- Even allowing for the Xmas/NY slowdown I think this nom has remained open long enough and all comments have been acknowledged; I'll therefore be promoting and if anything further needs to be discussed/resolved, e.g. Crypric's final point above, then it can happen via the article talk page. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.