Talk:Prehistoric art in Scotland/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 06:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be working on the review and post comments within the next couple of days. Interesting subject!--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for taking this on. I look forward your comments.--SabreBD (talk) 07:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overview

It's an interesting article and I like that the historical context is set for the prehistoric periods. The article is well organized, with inline citations to reliable, secondary sources. It's well-written in an encyclopedic tone. There is no evidence of original research. The article is stable. The images used in the article are properly tagged as free images.

Coverage

Significance

It would round out the article a bit more to have some content about whether works created for ceremonial or religious purposes, significance of the artwork, and meaning of symbols or images within the works of art, etc. See this book, and [this book as examples

The answers to this issues are usually speculative, since we have no evidence as to the way art was perceived. Also, I cannot get to the text of either of those books through Google. I will have a look today and see what I can turn up.--SabreBD (talk) 13:30, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, those books were just examples - and I think the conversation dates back to the 1850s, so there is some content to be found. I've written a bit about prehistoric art - mostly of the U.S., but also a bit about Asia, Britain, and Central and South America - so if you need help here, let me know. I can try and find more sources / info.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Works of art

Are there are other works of art from the prehistoric period: more specific forms of rock art (cave drawings, petroglyphs, etc.), pottery, ornamentation of clothing, baskets, etc.? If there are, is it possible to get images - or find some already in Commons but not categorized within the prehistoric Scottish art category? See this book - search on Scotland

These are the major forms of art from this period. If I had evidence of others I would have included it. We can always find more images, but I am not sure they will add much to the article.--SabreBD (talk) 13:30, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen information about pottery, ornamentation of clothing, cave drawings... I can work on this.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about the timing because there seem to be different definitions for the end of the prehistoric period: Should there be discussion and images of Pictish Stones or Runes? See Chapter 5,

The problem of time period is difficult in Scotland, largely because most of it does not have a classical period, because there is no long term Roman occupation. It is usually accepted that the Iron Age in Scotland continues until the post-Roman period, when Christianity takes root.--SabreBD (talk) 13:30, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused - does that mean Runes or Pictish Stones should / should not be included. I've seen them both classified as "prehistoric".--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Content

Intro

Is "all" needed in "includes all visual art..."?
Regarding "The earliest examples of art"... instead of example, what do you think of something like artifact or evidence?
Is "the last of" needed in "including the Westray Wife, the last of which is the earliest known depiction of a human face from Scotland." - since "including" only has one item and ", which" would apply to the item just before the comma?

Stone age

Regarding "These were part of a pattern that developed..." - is this a representation of a pattern of religious significance, other?
Is there a way to clarify how the items in the first paragraph (e.g., standing stones and circles) are works of art, if they are? Or, is this all context setting?
Regarding the petrosphere - its Wikipedia article, which is not properly cited, says that there were also artifacts found in Cumbria and Ireland.
If you know from your research: Is there anything more specific about: "Many functions have been suggested for these objects, most indicating that they were prestigious and powerful possessions.[7]" - such as other suggested functions or archaeologist's opinions about how they might have been used as a prestigious possession?
Is there an estimated date of the other two figurines known?

Bronze age

Regarding: "These show little sign of use or wear, so may be symbolic representations of power." - should "so" be "so they" or "and"?
I see "follow a pattern" again in this section without defining the pattern - What does "follow a pattern" mean to you? Are there any specifics (construction techniques, materials, symbolism) that describe how the works in Scotland are like those across Britain and in Portugal?

Template

As an FYI, there's a {{Prehistoric technology}} template that has an arts section.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Close paraphrasing

There are some close paraphrasing / copyright violations (copyvio report): < removed content per following comment >

You need to exclude Wikipedia from the search. These are all from Scottish art, a section of which was the basis of this article.--SabreBD (talk) 19:05, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whew, what a relief! I've never had that happen before - and I don't know of a way to remove Wikipedia from the search. Looking at one source at a time, I did some spot-checking and most seem to be fairly well paraphrased. Here's one you may want to look at from this source for "Many functions have been suggested for these objects, most indicating that they were prestigious and powerful possessions."--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:05, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I am not quite sure what to do with this review, given the unresolved issues on the talkpage. Would it be best to take it off, get consensus on changes, do them and then put it back up for nomination. I think it will be quite a lot of work and it unlikely that I will have that sort of time before Christmas.--SabreBD (talk) 17:37, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done - agreed. To keep track of the history, there are my review comments here + a discussion at Talk:Scottish art in the Prehistoric era#Concern regarding the nature of this article. It would be great to have the article reworked, likely renamed, and then renominated for GA.--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:43, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for all your work on this.--SabreBD (talk) 07:51, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]