Talk:Nina Simonovich-Efimova/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sabine's Sunbird (talk · contribs) 03:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's see how this goes.

Born into a family with German-Jewish roots whose professionals Maybe worth slipping in an In St Petersburg here?
she opened the first kindergarten in 1866 first in Russia? In St Petersburg?
Her mother's sister, Valentina Serova was Russia's first professional woman composer and her husband, Alexander was also a composer.[7] Not a review comment but damn that's a lot of talent in one family.
Paris where she studied under Louis Charles Delescluze for a year, before returning to Moscow to take private courses with Elizaveta Nikolaevna the lead discusses that she trained in arts over 20 years, but the introduction to her career section takes a long time to mention what she studied (or taught). I would make it more explicit what she was generally studying at the start of this section and then add more about what she learnt at each stage if you can.
After the October Revolution, I think this deserves a fresh paragraph
. After the October Revolution, convinced that she could no longer paint without her works serving a "beneficial purpose", Simonovich-Efimova's career turned toward professional puppetry. Creating a mobile theater, with the purpose of providing a joyful distraction to the civil war, the.. this is a touch clunky. So, maybe ...

. The events of the October Revolution convinced Simonovich-Efimova that she could no longer ... without her works serving a "beneficial purpose". She turned her career turned toward professional puppetry, creating a mobile theater, with the purpose of providing a joyful distraction to the civil war. The Efimovs began traveling and performing...

I elipsised out some of the text in my rewrite because I'm not clear if she opposed all art lacking a "beneficial purpose" or if she felt painting in particular lacked that purpose. Can you clarify?
Giving over seventy shows in Moscow and the surrounding area, over what timeframe?
Is anything known about the Efimovs transition to Bolshevik ruled Russia? She clearly came from a fairly well to do family so she and her husband must have been reasonably politically adept to continue to produce art and theatre in this time.
The Novgorod paintings began in a period when the Effimovs had fled Moscow due to political turmoil in 1935 further to my point above a little more information about why they fled (general fear or a specific threat) would be very interesting here, if known

Well, that's it. The article is very well written and will pass easily when the niggles are sorted. The biggest issue is as I note there is an untold story about how the couple navigated the political turmoil that overtook Russia during their lives. It is possible (or even likely) that the story is lost however and you can't tell it, in which case I might suggest putting in a note to that effect. Anyway, thanks for a great article and I'll finish the review soon. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:43, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sabine's Sunbird I keep running in to these Russian dynasties with multiple creative members. Her family was peculiar because they all ended up at the top levels of their craft. There doesn't appear to have ever been a complete biography on her written and many pieces focus on her work, rather than on her life (typical for women, sad to say). So the actual situations are impossible to determine. On their transition to Bolshevik rule, I found it really odd that they did not appear to have suffered any repercussions. (Her mom was evicted from her home, in spite of the town council's efforts to allow her to stay.) I inserted a sentence, the only mention I could find about the Red Terror period, that indicates possibly the reason—they chose to perform for children, probably assisted by the fact that they didn't have a permanent home during the period either. As the Great Purge, had a lot to do with clearing the party of bureaucrats and peasants which had fled to the cities during collectivization, the Effimovs don't appear to have been targets. As near as I can tell, they were apolitical, or at least intentionally apathetic to politics. I added a section that talks about the general fear, as I find nothing specific that indicates they were ever targets. Hope these corrections answer your questions. If not, let me know and I'll try again. Really, really appreciate your looking at her. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is a shame that historical research hasn't uncovered this yet. Hopefully this article will prompt a researcher to investigate that period of her life one day. Since the work hasn't been done yet, this article clearly covers what is known now without speculation or original research, so provides the acceptable level of detail for now. Thanks for making the suggested changes. Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sabine's Sunbird Thank you so much for looking at this one. Yes, I think it is amazing that no full biography of her has been done, since she is known both in Russia and the U.S. I was glad to find the theoretical texts, don't get me wrong, but I wanted to know more about "her". SusunW (talk) 12:41, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Excellent prose.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Good structure that flows well.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.	The questions I raised about their interactions with the revolution couldn't be answered without OR, and the writer has kept it very much to what is known.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig's tool comes up clear.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yep, seems very comprehensive
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yep, detailed.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Looks stable enough
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Two non free images, both have valid reasons for inclusion.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Good choice. If one becomes available, it would be nice to have a painting one day.
	7. Overall assessment.	Very good article, again, I hope to see it at FAC one day. Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]