Talk:Antoni Gaudí/GA2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lemurbaby (talk · contribs) 19:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Comments[edit]

  • There is a copyright issue with File:Casa mila ag1.jpg - the uploader took the image from a website but has not gone through the process to demonstrate that they first obtained the author's permission to do so. The editors will either need to attempt to obtain this permission from the author (ask me if you don't know how), try to find another image to use here, or remove it. Lemurbaby (talk) 08:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good choice; next time feel free to just "be bold" and replace the file Lemurbaby (talk) 11:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bibliographic information needed for several books in the References section, including: "El gran Gaudí", "Gaudí, la vida d'un visionari", "Ana Mª Férrin, Gaudí, de piedra y fuego", "Gaudí, l'home i l'obra," "Antoni Gaudí" etc etc. All books cited need to have full information in the References section. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, thanks to amazon.es for all ISBNs and other bibliographic info.Elizium23 (talk) 05:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The bibliographic information is not yet complete. Please have a look at this to find the templates needed for the citations, and to get a sense of the information needed to complete them. For example, book citations need the author's full name, book title, publishing date, publishing location, and publisher name. Also, page numbers are not added to the info in the references section, because the works have been cited (sometimes numerous times) in the notes section, where the page numbers are provided for the relevant piece of information. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:13, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
* This looks much better. Thank you! Lemurbaby (talk) 18:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]
I cannot get the Bergós references to link correctly using {{harv}}. Is it because this book has multiple authors, or the accent in the name? Alternately, there is another cite using a different name, I guess I could use that. Elizium23 (talk) 18:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]
Actually I'm not sure... I've always avoided the tl|harv myself and just stuck with the "plain" cite templates precisely for that reason. Wish I could be more helpful on this point. Lemurbaby (talk) 19:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]
I am finished with reference and bibliography work, so if anyone wants to double-check that everything is in place, that'd be great. Elizium23 (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks great! Lemurbaby (talk) 21:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please move all book citations to the reference section. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please use a tool such as Webcite to archive all the urls in this article. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:37, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please insert a citation where "citation needed" is indicated. Also, there are large sections of the text where citations are not provided. Please be sure to provide references to allow the reader (and me) to verify the content provided here. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:37, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are several dead links referenced in this article: "Hyperboloid structures by Gaudi", "Nacen los Premios Gaudí, que librará anualmente la Academia del Cine Catalán" and "Gaudí Center Reus". If you can find an archived version, or an updated link somewhere, please insert it here. Otherwise try to find an alternative source for the information that the linked material provided. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partly done. #1 and #3 were resolved and relinked. Failed on #2, regarding Gaudí Awards, (and incidentally the sole reference for that article has the same problem). I could not find a reference in any language after scouring several sites and Google. I marked the dead link. Elizium23 (talk) 06:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use (in Spanish) etc. to indicate when a citation or source is in a foreign language. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see you have now opted to use the language parameter in the templates, which works just as well. Thank you. Lemurbaby (talk) 18:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a strong reliance on foreign language sources when much is written about this architect in English. Per WP guidelines, for the English-language wikipedia it is preferred that articles use sources in English to the extent possible. Lemurbaby (talk) 10:04, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some English translations of books turned up in the library/Amazon searches, and so I used those as preferred references where appropriate. Elizium23 (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some of the references need page numbers. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The latter turned up as a chapter of Miscellania 2002. I have incorporated it in my reference work. Elizium23 (talk) 21:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • All that's left to for the references section is to find a more reliable source for the Javi Pelaez ref. Lemurbaby (talk) 21:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Elekhh

Just having a quick look at it:

  • the list of projects at the end could provide a better overview if would indicate the buildings which are WHS listed. Maybe the whole "short-list" should simply be replaced with a link to List of Gaudí buildings (currently not linked from this article!). --Elekhh (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]
  • Removed the list as redundant and provided links to the List of Gaudi buildings article instead. Lemurbaby (talk) 05:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Comments

  • Wikilinks: I find it confusing to have Wikilinks to individual buildings only in the image caption and not in the text
I hopefully addressed this for you with more liberal linking, especially if mentions were far apart in the long article. Elizium23 (talk) 05:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]
Yes, in particular the Works section was lacking links to the buildings described but now is fixed. --Elekhh (talk) 22:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose: I think is a bit lengthy to read. With 87kb of prose the guideline also suggests so. More concise style could benefit and maybe some text could be moved to relevant articles about the buildings. Other clarity issues:
  • The length will be addressed in the copy edit. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "nor did he leave behind many any written documents" needs clarification

Images Comments

  • At the beginning I found to be too many (11) illustrations of Gaudí. If any of them is not absolutely necessary and could be removed would help the biography section be less image heavy.
  • I have the impression that the images of buildings chosen are not always the best quality versions of what we have. For instance File:Parc Güell (12), July 2009.JPG or a cropped version of it could replace File:Cruz cuatro brazos.jpg, and I think we have better versions of Sagrada Familia than the current image
  • Hope these comments will help. Some of the points might go beyond GA criteria and were provided solely with the intention of further improving the article. I'll leave it with the GA reviewer to decide which to consider for this review.

In any case is great to see so much improvement over the last weeks! --Elekhh (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'll be combing through the images and removing some, but I'll leave others to replace them by better images since that's not really a requirement of GA so not urgent for now. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Elizium23
  • Question: Should we unlink redlinks to personal names, per WP:REDNOT? Unless there are specific examples of people who might have articles, I doubt notability could be established for many of them. Elizium23 (talk) 05:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, let's go ahead and undo redlinks for now. Lemurbaby (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've removed redlinks to most names of obscure architects, etc. AdeMiami (talk) 09:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm also noting that the article has a problem with overlinking. Terms like "beatification" are linked multiple times. We should ideally have links once on the first use in the lead, and once on the first use in the body of the article. Any help with this would be welcome - otherwise I'll try to take care of it this weekend. Lemurbaby (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comments by GreatOrangePumpkin
  • Check references 116 and 134
  • "Gaudi" or "Gaudí". Be consistent.--♫GoP♫TCN 11:22, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Comments

  • "Art critics in research and teaching positions since 1950 have given the artist a well-deserved position of relevance within 20th-century architecture." sounds dubious and ambiguous (exactly since 1950? "in teaching positions", art critics or architecture critics?, "well-deserved") and is unreferenced.
  • "Gaudí also designed urban settings and landscaping". Landscaping yes, but I am not aware of any street or square he would have designed, and no example is given. --Elekhh (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update

  • Sorry to have been away from this for a bit... it's been more labor intensive than I expected but I think we're nearly there after the copy edit, which I was hoping someone from the Guild would be willing to take on (no luck!). I've been very busy at work, but I intend to get to this and hopefully have the article passed by Monday. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


TO DO:

  • Find a more reliable source for the Javi Pelaez ref
  • More concise prose
  • Fewer/better photos
  • Address Elekhh's reference comments above
  • Sorry to interfere, but the last time the nominator addressed any of the points above was over ten days ago, and in the meanwhile you have become a main contributor so I suggest requesting a second opinion from an uninvolved reviewer, and let that editor make the closure as deemed appropriate. It is only a suggestion for your consideration. --Elekhh (talk) 04:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That sounds perfectly fair. I'll try to remember to post the request for second opinion after I'm done with the edits. :) Lemurbaby (talk) 05:03, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well there you have it. I forgot before giving it the pass on the talk page (going slightly out of order). Elekhh, do you want to weigh in? Is it good enough for GA? I think it's getting close to FA at this point and largely exceeds the GA criteria. There is more polishing that could be done to the prose, and I can agree that much of the information about his works could eventually be shifted to the World Heritage article about them, especially if they aren't presented in list format there. But if that were done, it would require expansion of the evolution of his style to represent these various periods, as right now that discussion is intermingled closely with descriptions of his works. So rather than attempt that monstrous task myself, I will do my job as reviewer to recognize that the article meets the GA standards at this point. Lemurbaby (talk) 14:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries, you did a fine job and I am ok with this standard for GA. Also your summary of how to further improve the article is very good, and probably should be included somewhere at the top of the talk page. Thanks for your great effort! --Elekhh (talk) 23:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lemurbaby, I sent you some WikiLove on your talk page, but I also want to respond here in public, to say thank you very much for your enlightening and patient review work. This is the first time I have significantly contributed to a Good Article and I'm thankful for the pointers and assistance you gave during the process. Elizium23 (talk) 04:59, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Antoni_Gaudí/GA2&oldid=1051371687"