Wikipedia:Peer review/The Disasters of War/archive1

The Disasters of War
This peer review discussion has been closed. Series of 82 prints by Francisco Goya. Any and all input welcome. Ceoil (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I found this to be a fascinating article and found it quite well done, though it needs some work before it would pass FAC. With that in mind, here are some suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:23, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The first sentence is too long and complicated. I would try something like "The Disasters of War (Spanish: Los Desastres de la Guerra) are a series of 82 prints created between 1810 and 1820 by the Spanish master painter and printmaker Francisco Goya." I would put the alternate title in both languages, the further two not considered canonical, and Goya's birth and death years later in the lead.
 * Done, but undecided if alt titles should be bolded. Ceoil (talk) 18:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Per the MOS, spell out words ten and under (so a further two are not canonical)
 * This also needs a ref, and a note in the article body. Ceoil (talk) 18:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if this applies to the plates - plate 10 vs. plate ten. Ceoil (talk) 18:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with that. Same case as "Number 3 on the Billboard charts" vs "Number 48 on...". Outriggr (talk) 03:41, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was not thinking of the plate numbers - assuming they are usually given as numbers (Plate 7) I would keep it that way. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * In the third paragraph of the lead, I would give the actual number of plates in each series "A middle series of X engravings..." and "The final group consists of Y images..."
 * The Background section is overall very nicely done. It needs a few things though. First there are two sentences that need refs: After Napoleon convinced Ferdinand to return Spanish rule to Charles IV, the latter was left with no choice but to abdicate, on 19 March 1808, in favor of Joseph Bonaparte. and also  During this time he visited many battle sites, to witness firsthand the Spanish resistance. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * I would also include some background on the Caprichos - these are referred to in several places and need to be given some context - see WP:PCR
 * I would be very consistent in referring to the prints. Since all of the prints are on Commons, I would link the images (and probably do this each time). If the image was shown in the article, I would say this and even give some idea where (at right, or below). I would also be very consistent in naming the prints (since this is the English Wikipedia, is there any reason not to give the English name, and then the Spanish name on each first mention of the print).
 * This is very problematic, as there are many possible English translations for each titles. An early para on the matter migh go some distance to resolving this. Ceoil (talk) 18:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am fine with the Spanish name first, but I do think some sort of translation is needed for those (myself included) who speak little or no Spanish. Is there a "standard" edition of the prints with English translations (i.e. could those English titles be used)? If not, then I think I would give the different possible translations on the first mention and then use only one from then on (if at all, I suppose it could be Plate 7 throughout). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I also have to confess that I found it difficult in many cases to figure out all the details in the prints - I think it helps to explain in some detail what is shown in each. For example, even in a fairly clear case, I thought that File:Goya-Guerra (37).jpg was a body missing an arm with a back wound, resting in a tree and did not realize the body was impaled until I read the description. In a more obscure / cryptic example like File:Goya-Guerra (80).jpg I had no idea what was going on (a glowing body?) and found the description essential. Even in something apparently very clear like File:Goya-Guerra (39).jpg, I did not realize the genitals had been mutilated until I looked at the Chapman's cast of it.
 * Sizes need to give both metric and English units per the MOS
 * Finally I wonder if it would be useful to have a separate list article showing all of the prints, with descriptions and the titles and sizes. A FL to go with the FA?

Comments from
 * You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.worldandi.com/newhome/public/2004/february/bkpub1.asp
 * Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 21:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)