Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Dance of the Twisted Bull/archive1

The Dance of the Twisted Bull

 * Nominator(s): &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

In 2000, Alexander McQueen ditched Givenchy to sell his label to the Gucci Group, who were far more appreciative of his subversive talents. To prove his worth, his first collection under Gucci would need to make some serious profit, so for his nineteenth collection McQueen tamped down on the theatrics and went commercial. The Dance of the Twisted Bull is a searing-hot exploration of bullfighting, flamenco, and sexuality that reportedly drove sales up 400%. ¡Olé! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Ceranthor

 * "Typically for McQueen, the collection included sharp tailoring and historicist elements and emphasized femininity and sexuality." - Should be rephrased at the beginning. "As was typical for McQueen" or "In McQueen's typical fashion the collection ..."
 * Done


 * "The runway show for Twisted Bull was staged on 6 October 2001, during Paris Fashion Week," - don't need those commas
 * Hm. Okay


 * "It was his first collection following his departure from Givenchy" - new paragraph, so replace his with McQueen's
 * Done


 * "Sales for the collection were reportedly strong." - are you opposed to removing reportedly? Because I feel like it adds nothing
 * The only source available for sales figure is the CEO of Gucci, so I'd prefer to stick with "reportedly", as he obviously has an incentive to present a positive view of his brand-new toy


 * "The runway shows for his last two collections before The Dance of the Twisted Bull had both been in this mode: Voss (Spring/Summer 2001) was staged as a voyeuristic look inside a stereotypical insane asylum, while the set dressing for What A Merry-Go-Round (Autumn/Winter 2001) included an actual carousel ride.[5]" - Instead of the colon I think a period is fine. Not a real sticking point but I think what follows is a bit too long for a colon.
 * Mm... I tried it with the period while writing it up originally and I prefer the colon, since I'm declaring something I'm about to explain. It just feels more right, I dunno


 * "Dresses were skintight and some ensembles had cutouts exposing skin." - need a comma after skintight
 * Done


 * "On some runway looks, the breasts of the models were fully exposed.[13][20][15] " - refs should be in ascending order
 * Fixed


 * "The juxtaposition of sexuality with violence and death, and the tension between aggression and fragility, were recurring themes in McQueen's work" - don't think you need these commas
 * Done


 * Few more instances where refs don't go in ascending order - fix those please
 * Oops, these should all be fixed now


 * "An unbylined style brief in The Guardian criticized the appearance of drop crotch pants in the collection, which they wrote were "not a nice look".[37] " - this last bit doesn't work grammatically I don't think... how about "which were described as "not a nice look"?
 * I went for a modified version of this


 * "The staff writer at Vogue España noted that the influence was a series of Spanish cultural clichés, but called the collection a "perfect adaptation" to his brand's new home at Gucci.[38]" - don't need the comma
 * Ok


 * ", but found the "dressmaking flourishes were too showy and indulgent".[40]" - don't need the comma
 * Ok

Prose is very strong here. Nearly happy enough to support on prose, but I would like to do another pass once these comments are addressed.  ceran  thor 02:55, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, how's it looking? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support on prose. Nice work!  ceran  thor 22:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Image review

 * File:Spear dress from Dance of the Twisted Bull.jpg: This image has a clear purpose in the article and appropriate WP:ALT text, and it has a complete WP:FUR that justifies its inclusion. I would personally archive the source link to avoid any potential link rot and death, but that is not required for a FAC (or really in general) so it is not an issue.
 * Done :)


 * Both File:Flamenca 001.jpg and File:Chaquetilla (cropped).jpg have clear purposes within their section, and each have appropriate WP:ALT text. Both are presented as original work from the editors, and I will WP:assume good faith in these contexts.
 * It might be nice to incorporate an image of Alexander McQueen in the article, but I am not sure if there is space for it as the "Background" section seems too short to support that kind of inclusion. It does not impact my image review in any real way, but I just wanted to throw that out there to get your opinion.
 * Honestly I thought of that way back with Armadillo shoe, but the only image we have of him is the one from the infobox in his article and... I really hate it, lol. He's rubbing his ear and his face is partly turned away and it's just not a flattering shot of the poor man. I tried looking through Flickr but there's nothing at all. I hope it won't bother you too much if I keep not using it.
 * That makes perfect sense to me. I do not think there is really a clear space to put into the article anyway, and I do agree with you that the image is less than ideal. I am the worst with finding free-use images so apologies for not being any help with that. But it is absolutely not a bother at all. Aoba47 (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

This passes my image review. I hope this was helpful. Unfortunately, I will not have the time to do a prose review (and I am no longer doing source reviews), but I still wanted to contribute to this FAC in some way, shape, or form so I thought it would be helpful to get the image review out of the way. Best of luck with the FAC and have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 03:10, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments Aoba, you're the best :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the very kind words! Aoba47 (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Comments by ChrisTheDude

 * "McQueen confirmed this was" => "McQueen confirmed that this was"
 * Ok


 * Image caption: "Woman dancing a traditionally-styled flamenco dress" => "Woman dancing in/wearing (both work) a traditionally-styled flamenco dress"
 * Oops, I did drop a word here


 * "The darker colors" - McQueen was British so UK spelling should be used
 * "had sexuality front and center" - same again
 * "emphasized the bodies of the models" - here too :-)
 * "with a red, black, and grey color palette" - and here :-)
 * "was a grungy glamor" - guess ;-)
 * "An unbylined style brief in The Guardian criticized" - one more here
 * "Dana Thomas wrote that it was the collection's "the most poignant look"" => "Dana Thomas wrote that it was the collection's "most poignant look""
 * Stray word fixed


 * " On the other hand, Davidson criticized" - another US spelling
 * "and one had beadwork resembling traditional suspenders" - assuming that by suspenders you mean the things that go over the shoulders to hold up a pair of trousers, in British English we call them braces (could wikilink to add clarity)
 * Hm, okay. I've piped a link.


 * " Although the text of the Victoria & Albert Museum Savage Beauty catalog" => " Although the text of the Victoria & Albert Museum Savage Beauty catalogue"
 * Think that's it - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 05:22, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your commentary Chris! Brit Eng is all fixed and anything else is noted above. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Support - nice one! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:34, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

SC
Putting down a marker... - SchroCat (talk) 14:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Another nice article - I enjoyed this one too, even if I'd never seen any of the pieces (his move from Givenchy to Gucci I knew about, but not what the work was like there). Just one piece of criticism here, which shouldn't take long to sort - it's the first paragraph of the Runway show section: That's my lot! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * "shown in London for London Fashion Week; Twisted Bull was the first collection he showed in Paris for his own brand, and he showed all his womenswear shows there until his death in 2010.[12][25] The show was sponsored by American Express, who had sponsored several of his previous shows.[26]" That's six uses of "show" (or variants) in those two sentences – and the previous sentence begins "The runway show"!
 * Oh, I always hate when I don't see myself doing that. I've adjusted the wording now, should be better. Thanks as always for reviewing, glad you're still enjoying the series. (If you are a MCQueen junkie, you may also be interested in Featured list candidates/List of Alexander McQueen collections/archive1.) Cheers! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks PMC - I haven't been round to FLC for a good few years, but I'll try and pop round at some point. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Support All good from me. - SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments Support from Tkbrett
In addition to the comments below, I made a few copy-edits on my way through that I thought uncontroversial.


 * "It was his first collection following McQueen's departure..."; I think flipping "his" and "McQueen's" would improve readability here: "It was McQueen's first collection following his departure..."
 * Yup, done


 * "...it was speculated that he would leave his contract early." Passive voicing here leaves it unclear who was doing the speculating. Critics and journalists? Execs at Givenchy?
 * Revised to "the press speculated"


 * "11 September attacks" struck me as a little weird to the ear. That article has a note at the top which specifies that the month is placed first, "even in places that use the opposite numerical dating convention". That's unsourced, but I think it is an uncontroversial claim.
 * This was someone else's change, but I think you're right and I'm going to tweak it back - it's not so much a date anymore as it is a proper noun


 * Chloe Fox's 2012 book is listed in the bibliography but is otherwise unused.
 * Oop yes I removed the only ref to it.

A nice read. The prose reads naturally even for a fashion-ignorant reader.  Tkbrett  (✉) 13:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * thanks for your comments, sorry it took me so long to respond! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * No sweat, . Again, nice work! Support.  Tkbrett  (✉) 12:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Source review
Bibliography: Nothing jumps out at me that would look particularly unreliable. Mind you, I know nothing about fashion.
 * Inconsistent linking (New York City is linked on third mention; some publishers are linked but Simon & Schuster is not).
 * Linked all NYCs, and publishers are all linked now except the two that are redlinks


 * Tzvetkova: I would suggest to cite more precisely the chapter/section on McQueen, pp. 357–359 (oddly enough, by scrolling down and then up, GBooks shows me the whole thing).
 * Done


 * Bethune and Evans in Wilcox (ed.) Not sure it is worth breaking the alphabetical order by author to have these two together, but acceptable.
 * I've used this format in previous FAs where I cite multiple chapters from the same anthology-style book. See Inuit clothing or The Widows of Culloden.


 * Lee is in Korean? kr? Also, the website gives a paginated PDF that should allow 184 instead of the odd-looking at.
 * Fixed page & lang tag.

References section to be looked through soon. —Kusma (talk) 20:34, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Above comments have been seen to. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Tzvetkova needs a location (Santa Barbara, California; Denver, Colorado). New Haven, Oxford and some of the New York/New York City still not consistently linked. I'll look at the refs tomorrow (got distracted by writing an article). —Kusma (talk) 22:02, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries. I've now removed all location links as the template documentation actually directs locations should be unlinked in most circumstances, and Tzvetkova has a location. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

References: Formatting is fine and consistent.
 * No. 25 Bolton p. 23 is in the Introduction, which technically is by Susannah Frankel, not sure if you want to make this citation more precise.
 * Have done now


 * Did a couple of random spotchecks, passed both verification and copyright/paraphrasing.
 * Is there an "issue number" for 50 British Vogue? If not, "March 2015" is certainly a working identifier and I was able to find the table of contents online and verify that the page number is OK.
 * Vogue doesn't seem to use issue numbers insofar as I can tell.

The above are just optional comments, overall the source review is a pass. Nice work. —Kusma (talk) 14:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kusma! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC)