Talk:Utagawa Toyoharu/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rationalobserver (talk · contribs) 18:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"floating pictures"

The lead looks really good to me, but, per WP:LEADCITE, I wondered if this quoted fragment needs a cite. It's really more of a ghost quote than an actual quote, so I may well be wrong.

It's not a quote, it's a gloss of "uki-e". Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:28, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Life and career

is said

There are four "is said"s in the first paragraph of this section, so please copyedit to remove two of them.

Better? So much of his life is speculation or educated guesses, right down to his birth year. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

art names

Is this the common term for an artist's pseudonym?

It's a bit complicated—there are a number of terms used. English sources seem to have glommed onto the term gō, but my understanding is gō is not always the correct name. I might use "pseudonym", except that in the Japanese art world (not just in ukiyo-e), pseudonyms are the rule, and there's a degree of formality around it (taking an element from one's master's name, or changing one's art name at important junctions in one's life, etc.) Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

in a refined, delicate style of beauties and actors

Is there a good link for "beauties", as a casual reader might not know what this means.

I thought it was more appropriate to have "bijin-ga" in the "Style" section, where it goes into it in a little more depth. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These prints tended to be of famous sites

I'd like to see this reworked to avoid "tended to be of".

Better? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He headed the painters

Same as above; this could be better.

I don't understand? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

under the buddhist posthumous name

This might confuse casual readers, so maybe an endnote to clarify is in order; maybe not.

It would be best if there were an article on it—Oh! Actually, there is. Linked. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Style

Harunobu pioneered the full-colour Template:Tansl print

Maybe this is like other redlinks, but this gives the appearance of a mark-up error.

No, that was a typo. Fixed. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While Toyoharu trained in Kyoto he may have been exposed to the works of Maruyama Ōkyo,

I wonder if some of these speculative statements ought to be in an author's voice, versus Wikipedia's.

Hmmm ... if it were an assertion, I might agree, but it appears to be a general speculation, rather than one owned by Little. Attributing it to Little would imply it was his idea, when rather he appears to be reporting it. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

By the 19th century, Western-style perspective techniques ceased to be a novelty had been absorbed into Japanese artistic culture

I'm not sure what's going on with the second sentence, partially copy-pasted above.

Missing an "and"—fixed. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

produced works in a far greater variety of genres than any other school

This begs for an "according to" type qualifier, as this seems a bit strong to have in Wikipedia's voice.

Again, this is a widely-held view—in other schools (and not just in ukiyo-e) the whole point of a "school" was to have a signature style. It's hard to put Utamaro, Kuniyoshi, and Hiroshige side-by-side and find much in common; in other schools it can be hard to do the opposite. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Woman Wiping Sweat, Utamaro, c. 1790s

I don't know any reason to include Utamaro in the Utagawa school. User:PaulNewYorkCity

Conclusion

This is a great article; a joy to read! Thanks for the contribution. It's well-written, broad in its coverage, neutral, and stable. It's also well-illustrated. I can't speak to the verifiability, as I don't have access to the print sources, but I imagine that will be looked at closer in the eventual FAC. I've made a few minor edits and suggestions, none of which should hold up passing this GAN, but I will wait to hear back before proceeding further. Rationalobserver (talk) 18:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks a lot for taking a look at this! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 04:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I see that we disagree on a few points, but I don't think any of these give cause to not promote. I do think there are a few issues with attribution, which might play into neutrality. E.g., "they demonstrate a much greater mastery of perspective techniques than the works of his predecessors", "claimed the genre's origin for himself", "Toyoharu's works have a gentle, calm, and unpretentious touch", "Toyoharu's were much more dexterous". These strike me as needing attribution, but I don't think this is an issue for GA. I hope you reconsider the voicing before you bring this to FAC. When you do, please feel free to ping me to the nomination page, as I'd be happy to review it again at that time. For now, I'm closing this GAN as passed! Nice work! Rationalobserver (talk) 17:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]