Wikipedia:Peer review/The Fourth Estate (painting)/archive1

The Fourth Estate (painting)


I'm listing this for PR, because I recently translated the majority of the page from the Italian Wikipedia. I would like to expand or correct portions of the text, but am having trouble doing so myself, because of my closeness to the text.

My main questions are:


 * 1) Does the overall structure of the article make sense? Are there any obvious sections missing, or can any of the existing ones be merged together?


 * 1) Are there any parts of the painting's history that should definitely be expanded?

Thanks, — WingedSerif (talk) 12:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi WingedSerif. I have reviewed the article as requested. My focus has been on clarity of language, especially given that this is a translation. Because I don't speak Italian, I have not looked through references to confirm that the information in the article is factually accurate. You may wish to ask someone else to do that.

Points on grammar and clarity
While I amended the article where the intent was obvious, the following passages were not clear:

"This time, he played with "contrasts of yellow and red, with the dominant ones in the sulfurous figures and the tones of blue to green in the background..." - What does "sulfurous figures" mean?

"Another detail of Fiumana is its universal value, crystallized in a poem written on the margin of the canvas by Pellizza:" - What is meant be "its universal value"?

"With Il camino dei lavoratori, Pellizza's social aim for the picture changed, as he passed to a socio-proletarian climate." - What is meant by "he passed to a socio-proletarian climate"?

"In this way, Pellizza harmoniously joined the "values of ancient classical civility to the modern consciousness of one's own civil rights."" - This is phrased as a quote but it is not stated who the quote is from.

"The painting is in the "chromoluminarist" or divisionist style," - I couldn't confirm that "chromoluminarist" is an English word. Either confirm this or look for a better term.

"Giacomo Bidone, al secolo Giacomo Maria Clemente Silvestro" - Is this the person's full name? If not, should the phrase "al secolo" be translated into English?

"The work received no recognition" - Do you mean it won no awards, or do you mean that nobody at the exposition took any notice of it? Please clarify.

"Despite the censure of critics," - The article to this point hasn't described any 'censure' (aka disapproval, condemnation). The paragraph above says it didn't get recognition, but that's different from being condemned. Either add more details of critics disapproving of or condemning it, or change this phrase to something like "Despite receiving little attention from critics" or "Despite being ignored by critics".

"in 1903 the painting was reproduced in the Milanese review Leggetemi! Almanacco per la pace," - It's unclear what "review" means in this context. From the text it sounds like it's a publication of some sort, but could this be made clearer?

"it was used as a symbol of the working class by appearing in Avanti! della domenica [it], a daily review of the Italian Socialist Party." - same issue as above in that the meaning of "review" isn't clear.

"it was displayed in a retrospective show dedicated to Pellizza at the Galleria Pesaro [it] in Milan, owing to the culture of the Biennio Rosso." - What does "owing to the culture of the Biennio Rosso" mean?

"it impressed a socialist councilor of Milan and art critic Guido Marangoni. With the municipal counselor Fausto Costa, he managed to purchase it through public subscription." - It's not clear if Guido Marangoni is both the "socialist councilor of Milan" and the "art critic". If it is, I would rephrase as "it impressed Guido Marangoni, who was a socialist councilor of Milan and an art critic. With the municipal counselor Fausto Costa, Marangoni managed to purchase it through public subscription."

"With the development of media, The Fourth Estate was populized outside of artistic and literary circles, appearing even in film" - Can you be more specific about what type of "media"? "Media" itself predated even the creation of the painting.

"Renato Guttuso used The Fourth Estate to compose his (now destroyed) 1953 Occupazione di terre in Sicilia." - What type of work was Occupazione di terre in Sicilia?

Tone
The tone of this article is highly complimentary of the subject. This isn't bad, as long as that's an accurate reflection of the world's response to the painting. Make sure you have researched negative opinions of the work as well (especially if you can find comments on it from its earlier exhibitions). Make sure also you represent different art critics' interpretations of the painting.

I would also be interested in seeing modern views of the painting in general. Is this a work that an average Italian person would recognise today? Is it the kind of thing you'd see in pop culture, like the Mona Lisa or The Starry Night? How many viewers does it get in person?

Overall
This is a high quality, well-written article. I like the structure and I believe it is well-laid out and not missing anything obvious. I have rated it B-class, and after you address the points above, I would encourage you to submit it for Good Article status.

HenryCrun15 (talk) 02:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your detailed read! For the points on grammar, I have tried to address each of them in this diff. For "sulfurous", I felt mixed about altering it since it was a direct translation, I believe it is meant to refer to the warm, yellow tones of the Ambasciatori. For the notes about popular reception, tone, and contemporary criticism, I have to admit that it has been hard to find sources, particularly in English. I've added information from some more recent articles, but I don't think it's quite there yet. — Wingedserif (talk) 19:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)