Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell)/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 not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 03:18, 27 December 2008.

Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell)

 * Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 

I'm nominating this article for featured article because of the low amount of flack it got at WP:MILHIST A-Class review. Maybe it is close to featured. I confess, I do not own any of the books that I reference. I borrowed them from the Chicago Public Library. I suppose I could borrow them again, but I will be leaving town for the holidays in 2.5 days. I hope I can get throught this review without the original texts.TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose for now by karanacs. First off, thank you for working on this article. These are some of my favorite Rockwell works, and I'm delighted to see them get the attention they deserve. While much of the content appears to be in place, I think that there is necessary background information missing, and I think the organization could do with more work. There are also several places where opinion is presented as fact - this should probably be attributed to whoever said it. I'm also concerned about a few of the sources used, and whether there are too many fair use images in the article. Karanacs (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Does the size of the paintings really need to be in the lead (much less in the second sentence)? That doesn't seem like one of the most critical pieces of information.
 * For art, this is common. See my very first successful FAC: Campbell's Soup Cans.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "should serve as a reminder of our motivation for fighting" - I think "our" here assumes that only Americans are reading this, and it might be wise to mention that this was fighting during World War II.
 * O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the lead ought to mention what the four freedoms are
 * O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * awkwardly worded - "who by the 1950s was rivaled only by Walt Disney for his familiarity with the public among visual artists" - "familiarity with the public" to me means that he was familiar with the public, not that they were familiar with him
 * changed to familiarity to the public.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Is it really important to know how many covers he illustrated during WWII? Anyway, it confused me at first because I thought the sentence read that he did a total of 34 covers about American life during the two wars, and that 33 of those came in WWII.  On a second read, I don't know that that is what the sentence is saying.
 * This information seems to be topical among secondary sources with several of them trying to quantify how well-known he was by using number of productions on the cover. We are a tertiary source with a responsibility to summarize secondary source info.  The average reader is probably too young to remember his popularity.  These numbers quantify them.  If you have problems with the grammar, I am willing to address them.  I think we should WP:PRESERVE the encyclopedic content.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:46, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The first phrase is talking about a certain type of subject that he painted on the cover during WWI and WWII 34 times. The second phrase is saying that he painted 33 covers during WWII some of which were of the aforementioned subject.  Let me know how I can clarify this.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what this sentence is trying to say "Rockwell's artistic expressions were said to have led to the adoption of the goal of the Four Freedoms in keeping with United States President Franklin Roosevelt's 1941 State of the Union Address"
 * How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that the last paragraph in the Rockwell and World War II section is really necessary. Some of that is already stated (in broader terms) in the preceding paragraph, and the rest doesn't seem relevant to this article.
 * That short paragraph was included to contextualize these works for those who don't remember.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:08, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think there needs to be more background information in the article about Roosevelt's speech and what the four freedoms are. The lead has detail that is not in the article body, and I think the article body needs a bit more.  The reader doesn't understand why the four freedoms are important, or why the speech was important (and, unless the reader read the infobox captions, they don't even know what the four freedoms are until halfway through the article)
 * I have added a section.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I suggest a new Background section that would incorporate what is now in the Rockwell and WWII section with information about FDR's four freedoms speech and possibly a bit of basic background on the war effort in America during WWII. Possibly a bit of the info in the production section could go there as well.
 * Given what I have added can you reconsider what further reorganization is desired.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There is some overlinking in the article. For example, do we really need links to models (linked twice in one paragraph), patriotic, etc?
 * Feel free to point out any links you feel are redundant. When I edit over time, I forget what terms have already been linked and sometimes get lax about checking.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "and eventually, 25 million people bought Rockwell's Four Freedoms prints" - as of what date? I know they are still for sale because I've given them as Christmas presents before
 * I added by the end of the 20th century since the citation is 1999.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * the production section is a bit out of chronological order. There is a paragraph on reprints before the publication is actually discussed.
 * I don't think the reprint stuff is out of order. I moved another sentence.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Can we go into brief detail on the essays that accompanied the posters? Who chose the essays (did Rockwell have any say)?  Who wrote them?  Did the essays get anywhere near the same level of recognition as the illustrations (I assume not, but it might be worth noting).
 * I have brief detail in each individual image article. The magazine chose the essays and I don't have any information on the critical review of the essays.  This article is about Rockwells freedoms.  Detail on the essay accompanying them probably does not belong here.  I will add the name of each author, but don't think anything further is appropriate here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we could get a bit of explanation of what a War Loan Drive is - I was confused about the 16-city tour.
 * Is that enough?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * need a citation after every sentence with a quote (this one is first I noticed: " written when Rockwell was "at the height of his fame as America's most popular illustrator."; there it at least one other in Provenance)
 * In both cases the citation was one sentence later. I added a citation so it is cited in consecutive sentences in both cases.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This likely needs to be attributed, as I suspect many would disagree that he did nothing "interesting" -> "he did nothing interesting, thought-provoking, rare or cutting-edge"
 * I have rephrased from the secondary source and gone back to a primary source it refers to.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * this likely needs to be attributed "has given the idyllic Norman Rockwell Thanksgiving work as important a place in the enduring marketplace of promoting family togetherness, peace and plenty as Hallmark at Christmas" - and some people may not understand the Hallmark and Christmas reference
 * The link is dead. I have some work to do.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * this likely needs to be attributed "nostalgia seemed to cause a bit of revisionism in the artworld."
 * I added a quote.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Provenance and Exhibitions can probably be combined as both are short sections
 * I don't think the article should go into such detail on the 1993 book.
 * It is only a four line paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Who owns the rights to the paintings now (for reprint purposes)? Rockwell donated the originals to the museum; the SEP gave one of them to the War Loan drive....
 * I also think that the book cover is probably not appropriate for this article under fair use guidelines. We already have several fair use images in the article, and since this article is not specifically about the book, I don't think the image is appropriate.
 * O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm also unsure whether you can justify having all four paintings shown here under fair use, especially when one of them is included in a PD image later in the article (Freedom from Fear).
 * I have yet to see a FA-class art article without a depiction of the art. This is a four work series. I think having the four works as displayed in the infobox is essential to a top notch presentation of the series.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * what makes artchive.org a reliable source?
 * The canton repository link is dead : http://www.cantonrep.com:8881/index.php?ID=318935
 * I don't believe that Encarta is an appropriate source
 * What makes "http://www.best-norman-rockwell-art.com/" a reliable source\
 * I don't think this is a reliable source: http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/2004/3/04.03.01.x.html
 * According to this the author is a U.S. history and Advanced Placement psychology teacher at Hill Regional Career High School. If he can teach kids in school and is an AP teacher he is somewhat of a reliable source.  If I would trust him to teach high school kids, why not a WP audience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * What makes http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAsaturday.htm a reliable source?
 * Not all references have publisher specified
 * What makes the HomeSchool Magazine an appropriate source for an art article?

Comments -
 * What makes the following sources reliable?
 * http://artchive.com/ftp_site.htm
 * http://www.best-norman-rockwell-art.com/index.html
 * http://www.tfaoi.com/newsm1/n1m369.htm
 * http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/2004/3/04.03.01.x.html
 * According to this the author is a U.S. history and Advanced Placement psychology teacher at Hill Regional Career High School. If he can teach kids in school and is an AP teacher he is somewhat of a reliable source.  If I would trust him to teach high school kids, why not a WP audience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.quinnpublishing.net/index.html (Note it's missing a publisher in the ref also (current ref 20 (Cutler)).
 * http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAsaturday.htm (Lacking a publisher in the reference also (current ref 21))
 * http://www.thehomeschoolmagazine.com/How_To_Homeschool/articles/300.php
 * http://www.junior-philatelists.com/index.shtml
 * http://www.collectiblestampsgallery.com/proddetail.asp?prod=AM46
 * Encarta isn't usually a great source for wikipedia, as it's also a generalist encyclopedia. Our job is to use secondary sources, not tertiary ones like generalist encyclopedias. An artist encyclopedia would be a better source, but the best would be a biogrpahy of Rockwell.
 * Per the MOS, link titles in the references shouldn't be in all capitals, even if they are in the originals. (I know I've mentioned this before in FACs for you, Tony... )
 * Sorry.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 26 (Congressional record), the formatting is off somehow, you've got a bare url showing.
 * I fixed the bare url and redlink in that ref.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 36 (Rockwell's Rosie the Riveter...) is lacking a publisher
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Sandy Georgia (Talk) 04:27, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed two of the three. The Palette dab actually shows the primary definition as part or the dab.  There is nothing I can do.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Notes: MOS:ALLCAPS in the citations, endashes on page ranges, and WP:PUNC logical quotation issues throughout.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have gotten the CAPS and Dashes. I will try to read PUNC tonight and figure out what you are talking about.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you were talking about how where the punctuation goes with respect to quotations, I think I have corrected any problems. I know there may be other PUNC issues.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

NOMINATION WITHDRAWN--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.