Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jean Bellette/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 05:16, 16 July 2014.

Jean Bellette

 * Nominator(s): hamiltonstone (talk) 00:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

This article is about an Australian modernist painter, whose unorthodox choice of subject (classical Greek myth) at a time when critical nationalism was in full swing in art both won her acclaim (two wins in the Sulman Prize) but also nonplussed critics in the long run. To anticipate one query - why so little about the decades of her work after she went to Majorca in 1957 - the answer is: because no-one writes about them. I don't understand why, either. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Support from Mirokado
-- Mirokado (talk) 20:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC) Thanks.
 * Please correct CS1 problems:
 * invalid date contents such as "purchased 1954" (three occurrences, see Category:CS1 errors: dates)
 * I have changed two of the three cases. With respect to the third, this has a history. During the FAC process for Florence Fuller, Nikkimaria and I had a discussion about what to do with the citation of works of art in gallery collection databases, when referencing the fact of the gallery's ownership. She correctly pointed out that the date to include is the acquisition date, not the date at which the work was painted. That is the reason for the use of this language. I realise it produces a CS1 error, but my concern is the accurate citation, not whether the code likes it. If however you can suggest a way to include the date that works around this, i'd be happy to know, as it would be great to not get those error messages.hamiltonstone (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * deprecated parameters in Klepac, Lou (June 2012) cite (use , see Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters)
 * Done. This is a bit frustrating, since the parameter names came from a WP template in the edit options bar...hamiltonstone (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * use  consistently (instead of sometimes   or whatever too)
 * Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Non-free images: I can see why you want them, but unless things have changed they are not allowed in an FA (someone please comment if this is no longer the case)
 * Chiming in to say that non-free images are most definitely allowed in FAs as long as the rationale is strong enough.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 23:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Early life and training: "She subsequently was" -> "She was subsequently"
 * Done.hamiltonstone (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Career: "about some of whom Bellette published writings": "... published articles" would read better (unless the contributions cannot be regarded as articles of course)
 * Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Please add alt text to the images. The alt text is for vision-impaired readers and describes what we can see in the picture.
 * Max Dupain took a photo of Bellette in 1936 which is I think in the public domain in Australia since taken before 1955, thus probably in the U.S. too. You would need to contact the National Library of Australia. If this or a similar picture can be used, we should probably use it.
 * I've ruled that one out, because Max Dupain is a recognised artist and as such that photograph would be treated as a work of art, not as a regular snap - as such, its copyright depends on the death date of the artist, not on the fact that it was taken before 1955. I believe Commons is mistaken in hosting at least one photograph by him. However, i'm not an expert; if there has been a discussion on WP or commons that concluded that all photographs are covered by the pre-1955 rule, regardless of their maker / artistic quality, then i would change my view.hamiltonstone (talk) 11:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm still thinking about the date issue... Neither that nor the answers to the following open questions are likely to stop me supporting this well-written article: --Mirokado (talk) 10:52, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Can the Retrospective in 2004–2005 be a source of more information than is currently used? Should it be mentioned as as significant milestone in its own right?
 * I have used the publication associated with that as an extensive source now. hamiltonstone (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The S H Ervin Gallery Exhibition Calendar 2005 says "This comprehensive retrospective offers the first opportunity to re-assess and celebrate the remarkable life and career of Jean Bellette. The exhibition explores her expressions of neo-classicism, still life and drawings from the 1930s, 40s & 50s, through to her work as an expatriate artist in Majorca from 1958 until her death there in 1991." That is of course advertising blurb, but perhaps the exhibition catalogue has background articles.
 * Amanda Lawson in "A Speculative Venture: Contemporary Art, History and Hill End" says: "If the concept of national identity associated with the bush myth was notorious for its exclusion of women, Indigenous people and urban/suburban life, the artistic traditions that came to be identified with Hill End were equally exclusive: painting was the medium that counted, landscape the subject of choice. A female artist such as Jean Bellette (1909-1991), for example, although a member of the Hill End Group, only achieved significant recognition through a retrospective exhibition in 2004; her interest in classicism sits uneasily with the populist focus of 'vernacular modernism' (Wilson 21-24)."
 * This asserts the significance of that exhibition.
 * It mentions her gender. Is there any widespread suggestion that this, as well as her choice of subject matter, was an issue?
 * I have picked up at least one source in this, in my latest revisions.hamiltonstone (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * "The Hill End Group" is not mentioned in our article by name as "a Group". Should it be?
 * Have now mentioned this.hamiltonstone (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will work on your (and Ceoil's) comments over coming days).hamiltonstone (talk) 11:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thorough response. I'll have another look through the article over the weekend since you have added quite a lot of material, but I imagine anything I notice would be minor now: alt text is still needed for the images . Changing to support. --Mirokado (talk) 20:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I've now looked through the article again. It is a good read. -- Mirokado (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * lead: "Married to artist and critic Paul Haefliger, the couple moved to Majorca in 1957. Though she visited and exhibited in Australia thereafter, she did not return to live, and became peripheral to the Australian art scene." There is a transfer of subject from Jean to the couple and the sentence links the two events too closely – they were married in 1935. How about: "Bellette married artist and critic Paul Haefliger in 1935. The couple moved to Majorca in 1957: although she visited and exhibited in Australia thereafter, she did not return to live, and became peripheral to the Australian art scene."
 * Better - changed it accordingly. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * refs and citations:
 * there are three unresolved callouts to French 2004 and one to French 2005. It can be difficult to spot these without mechanical help. so I suggest you install User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js. I guess these are to the France 2004 gallery catalogue (in case anyone else spot-checks WorldCat, you correctly refer to Christine France even though some listings say Christine Francis), but there are a couple of other problems which would also need to be sorted out
 * Resolved.hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * French 2004 p. 2, the page range does not match any of the citations
 * I couldn't work out how to cite the inside cover page without creating another cite to the same book. But i've done that now. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * France 2004 citation has the same chapter title as Hall 2004 – I guess there is a copy-paste error
 * Fixed. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Grishin 2013, WorldCat says 2014 for both visible editions, please check
 * I have the book, and it has 2013 printed on the title page.hamiltonstone (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response. I have made a couple of further changes to the bibliography, it was simpler to do it than to describe what I felt was necessary. I see no further issues so I wish you happy editing. --Mirokado (talk) 04:37, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Image review
 * Non-free images are allowed in FAs; however, the "n.a." parameters should be filled in for the FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment The article as written is very good, and the prose are great; to the point, elegant and clear. But I get no sence of her as an artist, what/whom she was influenced by, what she was interested in, which formats, colour ranges, subject matter, etc she used. This is esentially a bio timeline, which in most painter's articles would be the first half of the page. I realise this is difficult with more modern painters, but I would be delighted to see a "works" or "style" section. Ceoil (talk) 22:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note, I am leaning support here; and it may just be a matter off adding quotes from reviews, and consolidating material already on the page. Ceoil (talk) 22:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ceoil. I've added some material, but need to try and get to one particular reference work to which i've not had access. There's also a 1946 review i haven't had the chance to quote. I'll have to think some more about reorganising the text to create a specific section on her works or style.hamiltonstone (talk) 13:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm very pleased to see these additions. Otherwise, Ive gone through this article in detail, with minor c/es, and am overall impressed by both editor and artist. But...continue! Ceoil (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll be busy this week, but can you ping me on my talk when you want me to revist re the expansion. Ceoil (talk) 22:11, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Just an update to say that this has now been added, and there is just one more source I'd like to check, though i don't know when i will get access to it.hamiltonstone (talk) 13:22, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've found everything, I think. These are the final changes. Thank you Ceoil, let me know what you think.hamiltonstone (talk) 13:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * (Note to delegates, though i expect you already know - Ceoil appears to have retired to County Antrim...which sounds lovely.) hamiltonstone (talk) 12:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Re my reservation on comprehensiveness; has been met, am happy now to support. Ceoil (talk) 23:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Support Comments from Jim
An interesting article. You're an old hand at this, so just a few quibbles before I support. I'm a Brit, so ignore comments where Oz usage differs Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:30, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd link "Hobart"
 * Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * She regularly painted scenes—I wonder if you mean "frequently"?
 * Indeed. Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Displaying works in the 1934 student art exhibition, her drawings and watercolours attracted favourable comment—ungrammatical, I think ;  Her drawings and watercolours displayed in the 1934 student art exhibition attracted favourable comment
 * Better, thanks. Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * about some of whom Bellette published articles in the journal Art in Australia.—clunky, perhaps some of whom Bellette wrote articles about in the journal...
 * Changed. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * caryatids—footnote after ref explaining this obscure word?
 * note added. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * black and white—in BE this should be hyphenated
 * Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * but reconciled—in BE, I'd add "were"
 * Changed. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * that reflected a Spanish influence—Is this actually what the source says? Majorca has quite a distinctive culture, and the language is closer to Catalan than Spanish
 * I don't have access to that book now. From memory it said Spanish - i think because it was framing this as much geographically as culturally. I certainly do not recall any reference to Catalonia in any of the sources. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * rise of abstract expressionism, strong influence of a small number of gallery owners—I'd put "the" before "strong"
 * Agree. Done. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I prefer Australian regions to be spelt out, but it needs to be consistent (you have a mix of spelt-out and abbreviations)
 * It seems odd to abbreviate "'Victoria" while spelling out the longer New South Wales, and even odder to have two variants of capitalisation for the shortened form.
 * Fixed (i hope). hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Changed to support above. With regard to the caryatids, my preference would be to use footnote format rather than reference format since it's a comment rather than a source. I leave that to your discretion, but either way I'd be inclined to move the link to the end rather than intruded into the quote Jimfbleak - talk to me?  12:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Switched. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * Don't double location in newspaper refs - for example "The Argus (Melbourne) (Melbourne"
 * Hopefully now fixed. hamiltonstone (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * FN41: page? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:32, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Good question. This is a fifty year-old clipping held in the collection of the National Library of Australia. All other clippings there are paginated but this one is not. I can only surmise that it came from an unnumbered supplement section or something (though it might also just have been an error). There's nothing i can do about it though... hamiltonstone (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


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