Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Overlook (Alexander McQueen collection)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 31 March 2024 [1].

The Overlook (Alexander McQueen collection)

[edit]
Nominator(s): ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1999 was a good year for Alexander McQueen. No. 13, his Spring/Summer 1999 collection, was an incredible work of romanticism whose finale - Shalom Harlow being spray-painted by robots - is a famous work of art in its own right. No one expected him to match the success of No. 13 with his Autumn/Winter show, but he managed to exceed expectations with The Overlook, a staggering work of heartbreaking genius in which McQueen channeled the wintery isolation of The Shining into a fashion collection. Famously, one model wore a corset made from coiled aluminium, and another, a bustier covered in raw rock crystal. Although some critics complained of the theatrics and the use of real fur, it is widely regarded as one of McQueen's best works. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Epicgenius

[edit]

Saving a spot here. Feel free to needle me if I haven't left feedback in 3-4 days. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Para 1: "It was inspired by the Stanley Kubrick horror film The Shining (1980) and named for the Overlook Hotel" - First, is the Overlook Hotel fictional? If so, you may want to add "fictional" before "Overlook". Second, I recommend a comma after "Hotel" for flow.
    • Added fictional, didn't add the comma - I think Sammi Brie would tell me not to
  • Para 2: "Vogue editor Anna Wintour, making her first appearance at a McQueen show" - I suggest "Vogue editor Anna Wintour, who was making her first appearance at a McQueen show" or something like that.
    • Done
  • Para 2: I notice that the "Production details" subsection of the "Runway show" section is not really mentioned in the lead. Perhaps that section can be briefly summarized here.
    • Added a tad about the repeat creative team, but not sure the rest
  • Para 2: Also, for the "Notable pieces" subsection, it might be good to mention the rock crystal bustier and the coiled corset as being particularly significant.
    • The coiled corset was already mentioned in para 1, but I've revised it to add
  • Para 3: The first two sentences seem a bit disjointed: the first talks about positive reception, then the second suddenly pivots to a criticism. How about something like: "Critical response to the clothing and the runway show for The Overlook was positive, and it is regarded as one of McQueen's most memorable shows. However, some observers objected to the use of real fur."
    • Revised to account for other criticism instead, without the however
Background:
  • Para 1: "British designer Alexander McQueen was known in the fashion industry" - Should this be "had been known"? (As in, the knowing is continuous, not a one-time thing.)
    • I don't think so, although I can't muster a better argument than "it doesn't feel right"
  • Para 2: "Other explicitly film-inspired collections include The Birds (Spring/Summer 1995), The Hunger (Spring/Summer 1996), Deliverance (Spring/Summer 2004), and The Man Who Knew Too Much (Autumn/Winter 2005)" - Similarly to the above, should this be "have included"?
    • This, I don't think so, because the including is continuous
  • Para 3: "He had a light touch with collaborators" - This seems a bit idiomatic compared to something like "He allowed collaborators wide latitude" (though, you do use "latitude" again later in the sentence).
    • OED doesn't note the phrase as idiomatic
Concept and creative process:
  • Para 1: "named after the Overlook Hotel where much of the film takes place" - As above, I'd recommend a comma after "Hotel".
    • I've added fictional, but as above, no comma
  • Para 1: "Some reviewers detected influence from the Arts and Crafts movement," - Any specific reason why they thought it was evocative of the Arts and Crafts movement?
    • Revised
  • Para 3: "As always with McQueen" - I'm all for wording like this, but it sounds a bit too colloquial for FAC. How about "As with McQueen's other work"?
    • Went with "As was typical with"
  • Para 3: "The boots worn by the models were designed to have heels" - I'd shorten this to "The boots worn by the models were designed with heels" or just "The boots worn by the models have heels".
    • Done
More in a bit. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Production details:
  • Para 1: "these were resolved in time for the show to proceed" - I think this can be reworded to "these were resolved before the show" or "these were resolved without interrupting the show".
    • Went with option 2
  • Para 1: "andVogue editor Anna Wintour" - You should add a space before "Vogue".
    • Lol, yes
  • Para 2: "Joseph Bennett, who had designed all of McQueen's runways since No. 13 (Spring/Summer 1999)" - Isn't this show (Autumn/Winter 1999) at the beginning of the year? So The Overlook seems like it's coming before No. 13. (More to the point, is "Autumn/Winter 1999" referring to shows in late 1998 and early 1999?)
    • Fashion seasons are off compared to natural seasons, because they follow industry practices. The runway show is always staged about 6 months before the collection is going to be in stores (to allow for purchasing, production, delivery, etc). So, Autumn/Winter collections are shown in February (ish), and Spring/Summer collections are shown in October (ish).
    • That being said, I don't think it's that confusing. This one is labelled as A/W 99, #13 is labelled S/S 99. Most people will logically infer that Spring/Summer comes before Autumn/Winter, and also, I mentioned earlier that No. 13 is the previous show. So I think readers will follow.
  • Para 3: "Because the vinyl release of the film's soundtrack was rare" - I suggest "Because few copies existed of the vinyl release of the film's soundtrack".
    • Number of copies isn't strictly supported by the ref - all it says it that it was "hard to source". I've changed the wording to say "difficult to find"
Catwalk presentation:
  • Para 2: "the film's Overlook Hotel was built on" - I suggest "on which the film's Overlook Hotel was built".
    • Much nicer, yeah
  • Para 3: "Look 8 from this phase" - Does this use of "phase" carry the usual meaning of "part" (period, chapter, episode, etc.) or does it have a different meaning here? Usually, I only use "phase" to mean "part" if we're talking about time period. In addition, what is "this phase" referring to - is it referring to the soft brown/taupe/pink phase?
    • I've used "phase" before in this context; def 1 in wiktionary is "A distinguishable part of a sequence or cycle occurring over time", which I think fits.
    • I did mess up the order though with Look 8, now fixed.
  • Para 4: "McQueen took his bow The show earned a standing ovation, regarded as a rare achievement in the fashion world" - This looks like it's missing punctuation or a few words.
    • YUP lol. That was a leftover from when I realized I had lost the soundtrack section :|
Notable pieces:
  • Para 2: "Leane built the aluminium corset over the course of six weeks, working 16-hour days" - I'd say "Leane worked 16 hours a day for six weeks to build the aluminium corset" or something like that.
  • Para 3: "Taking it on and off could take up to 15 minutes." - The word "take" is repeated in close proximity here. I'd say "Donning and doffing the corset could take..."
    • I went with the slightly longer "putting it on and removing it" if only because donning and doffing have always been very silly sounding words to me
More in a bit. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reception:
  • Para 1: "Anna Wintour, although reputedly difficult to please" - Is this view attributed to a specific commentator, or just in general?
    • In general. She has an industry-wide reputation for being extremely unpleasant. Meryl Streep's character from The Devil Wears Prada is based on her, if that gives you any idea. The Telegraph ref that follows that sentence covers her reputation fairly broadly, and the other ref is for the actual "I loved it" quotes from her.
  • Para 1: In general, the second half of this paragraph feels a bit repetitive. You have three sentences in a row that are structured like "In A, B wrote that C" or the similar construction "B wrote in A that C" (emphasis on the repetition of the words "wrote that", which is my main point of contention). I'd rephrase it a bit, and personally I would also paraphrase at least one of the quotes per WP:RECEPTION, though this is not required.
    • Ohh ugh yeah, I didn't even notice. Adjusted these and a few elsewhere, and paraphrased a couple quotes
  • Para 2: "Menkes argued that McQueen's time there had enabled him to elevate his signature styles to match them to the winter theme." - The second part of the sentence repeats "to" three times. Is there a way this can be condensed, like "Menkes argued that McQueen's time there had enabled him to match his signature styles to the winter theme"?
    • This is much better, thank you
  • Para 3: "evidence of McQueen's growing maturity" - Maturity in what sense? I get that it's figurative, but do you mean the maturity of his designs, his career, or something else?
    • Designs, career, personality in general. Early on, McQueen was a bit of a shock jock - he made good clothes but he also did a lot of gross weird stuff that critics often put down to immaturity. They saw him as a kid lashing out for attention even if it's negative. Once he started making it in the industry, he toned it down somewhat, and reviewers often responded by noting what they saw as his growing maturity. This reviewer doesn't really get into the weeds with it unfortunately.
  • Para 4: "Winwood wrote that "animals rights campaigners will be less than impressed" with the rabbit fur and crocodile skin." - That reminds me, did animal rights campaigners have any opinion on this?
    • Not that I ever came across. They did vandalize the set for the show after Eye (so two seasons past this one), so maybe they just took a bit to get planning
Analysis:
  • Para 2: "In addition to its explicit references to The Shining, The Overlook also reflected the film" - The phrasing "In addition ... also" is redundant because "also" means "in addition". I suggest removing "also".
    • Done
  • Para 2: "Similarly, the skating segment interrupts the usual sequence of a fashion show. It uses the same song" - Because the show has already occurred, should this be past tense instead of present tense?
    • Done
  • Para 3: Were there any other examples cited by Skogh, other than the bodice? (Unrelated, but it would be funny if the Swedish king got an artificial mountain.)
    • No, just that one from The Overlook. Yeah, gifts given to royalty were really weird back in the day
Legacy:
  • Para 1: I'm not sure if Eye would be considered legacy, if McQueen already knew prior to The Overlook that he would be hosting Eye at NYFW. Though there might be a good reason for this.
    • I've retitled to "aftermath and legacy". Mostly it's important because it was already generating coverage even while The Overlook had just been staged.
  • Para 3: "The coiled corset was the sole item from The Overlook to appear in original 2011 staging" - Might just be an ENGVAR thing, but in the US we'd generally say "in the original 2011 staging".
    • It's not, I'm just stupid
That's all from me. Overall, a very good article. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Epicgenius, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild, I left a few comments an hour ago that haven't been resolved yet. Once these are resolved, I think the article will look good. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Epic, I misread "That's all from me." Time to take a break. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are all resolved now :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Looks all good now. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Edge3

[edit]

Just a quick comment. At the recent FAC for oyster dress, we disagreed on the applicability of MOS:SEASON. After that discussion, I modified MOS:SEASON for copyediting and clarity. Although the current version of the guideline has a provision for a "title of a work", there is an exception for a "seasonal edition in running text". If you disagree with that guidance then I suggest taking it to the talk page, where you'll see a recent discussion on this topic.

I don't have time to conduct a full review currently, but if this is still open in April I might be able to help out. Edge3 (talk) 06:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously my feelings on the matter remain as they were, and I will continue to capitalize fashion seasons as proper nouns, per the consensus of over a dozen FACs now. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus for oyster dress (and your other articles) was based on the previous version of MOS:SEASON, which has since been amended. You could discuss your disagreements on the MOS talk page, where I did ping you to participate. Edge3 (talk) 14:40, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, MOS:SEASONS has been amended by you, with wording that you arbitrarily decided on! I saw the ping and deliberately didn't participate in the discussion because your behavior at the oyster dress FAC clearly demonstrated that you have no interest in listening to the opinions of other editors. Something like over half a dozen people responded there to tell you you were wrong, and you still unnecessarily opposed. And the article passed, which indicates the coords did not feel your oppose carried much weight.
As it happens, the capitalization is still correct under your wording: "Season names are generally not capitalized (a hot summer), except when personified (Old Man Winter) or when part of a formal name". A fashion season such as "Autumn/Winter 2008" or "Resort 2014" is a formal name for a particular period in the industry, so it is capitalized. Other editors clearly agreed with this interpretation in the last discussion, so although the MOS wording may have changed, the reality underpinning my reasoning has not.
I am not interested in debating this with you at every FAC I nominate in the future. I am not going to change it. It is not up for debate. If you feel you must oppose on the basis of capital letters, just do that and let the coords weigh it accordingly. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Night Watch

[edit]

Saving a spot. The Night Watch (talk) 21:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Night Watch gentle poke :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Almost done! Sorry, my health hasn't been particularly good lately. The Night Watch (talk) 23:05, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem! I understand completely. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, here are some comments. I'm unfamiliar with fashion articles but I can still provide some general notes:
    • Is the wikilink to aluminium necessary? I think most people know what aluminium is but you don't need to remove it, this is just a simple preference of mine.
    I tend to land slightly on the side of "why not" when it comes to links
    • "Some reviewers detected influence from the Arts and Crafts movement, which McQueen had drawn from in his previous collection, No. 13 (Spring/Summer 1999)" What kind of influence exactly?
    Resolved already per Epic's comments - I now mention the knitwear and embroidery the critic was referencing
    • "surprised the audience by instead taking inspiration from its wintery, isolated setting" —> "wintery and isolated" and maybe remove the wikilink to setting.
    I'm not sure the "and" works better than the comma. Can you clarify your thinking?
    • "The Overlook attracted its share of criticism" —> some criticism
    Hmm. Tweaked.
    • "McQueen had announced that his next collection"
    I think the "had" belongs, as we're talking about two past events, one of which occurred before the other.
    That's it. The article is very well written and I could not find many more points without being nit-picky. The Night Watch (talk) 14:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi The Night Watch, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do support. The Night Watch (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments and support The Night Watch, I've made a change and replied to some others. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PCN02WPS

[edit]
  • "named for the 1976 Martin Scorsese film." → might be more helpful to link "the 1976 Martin Scorsese film" to Taxi Driver rather than just linking Scorsese's name
    • Done
  • "latitude for interpretation, and often" → remove comma - see Sammi Brie's comment below. It appears that I am sadly still a comma novice sometimes. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:27, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "andVogue editor" → missing space
    • Fixed in Epic's comments above
  • "making her first appearance" → tense switches from past to present here, perhaps "who made her first appearance"?
    • Fixed in Epic's comments above
  • "McQueen's runways since No. 13 (Spring/Summer..." → "No. 13" is already linked in the first paragraph of "Concept and creative processes"
    • WP:DUPELINK allows duplicated links in separate sections if they're relevant
  • "McQueen took his bow The show earned" → something funky here, part of the sentence either missing or misplaced
    • Fixed in Epic's comments above
  • "Anna Wintour, although reputedly" → Wintour is linked earlier in the article
  • "was learning at Givenchy had influenced" → Givenchy already linked
    • Dupelink again for these two
  • "elevating it from kitsch" → if "kitsch" is kitsch, recommend adding the link
    • Ah yeah good thought
  • "offering The Overlook and Voss (Spring/Summer 2001)" → Voss can be delinked since it's linked at the end of the previous section
    • This I've done because they're quite close
  • "brand internationally, and was clear" → remove comma
    • Done
  • "the revised 2015 stating" → typo
    • Yup lol

Nice work as always, that's all I've got as far as prose is concerned. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sourcing is as perfect as I would expect. The PRNation source is probably as good as one could expect for what it supports. I think it adds something about the lasting impact of the show. The daily record is the only newspaper with a location. You might want to consider removing it for consistency reasons.

Unrelated, the MOS:SEASON dispute seems to be based on a misunderstanding of how the fashion industry works. *channels Miranda Priestly giving her cerulean blue speech* Most designers release two major collections per year, traditionally titled Spring/Summer and Fall/Winter, that are shown at the major fashion weeks. You sometimes see one or two additional collections of more "fun" clothes titled something like Resort, Cruse, Holiday, Pre-Fall, Pre-Spring, etc. The names are of the seasons, but they are shown at times that line up with the southern hemisphere's seasonality while being created for Europe, Canada, and the US. The name Spring/Summer 1999 shows clothes debuted in 1999 that were created for warm weather rather than speaking about the seasons as spoken of in normal English. I encourage reviewers to see it as a term of art or a descriptive part of the title of the work. --Guerillero Parlez Moi 20:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the comments and source check Guerillero; always appreciate it. (In case it matters to any coords, I *think* the source being identified as PR Nation is the RR Auction source. Please correct me if I'm wrong.) Daily Record location removed. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Sammi Brie

[edit]

I reviewed the GA and am here to take a look at FAC too. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "The runway show was staged on 23 February 1999, at Gatliff Road Warehouse in London." no comma needed here because dmy
    • Fixed in both instances
  • I disagree with PCN's "latitude" remark. That's an appositive: "He had a light touch with collaborators, providing short creative briefs that permitted latitude for interpretation, and often did not see the work he had commissioned until right before the show." You could read the sentence without the bolded section.
  • "As always with McQueen" is "As always" appropriate wikivoice?
    • I swapped to "as was typical" per Epic's comments
  • Should "trip hop" be linked?
    • Sure why not
  • "Prior to the show, McQueen had announced that his next collection, Eye (Spring/Summer 2000) would be presented" you need a comma to complete the appositive after "2000"
    • Done
  • "McQueen viewed this as a step toward developing the brand internationally, and was clear from the outset that he intended to return to England the following season." Classic CinS. There's one subject: McQueen. Toss the comma.
  • "Stating" or "staging"?
    • Both of the above done per PCN

Thanks for your comments Sammi! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to flip to a support. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

[edit]

File:McQueen, Musée des beaux-arts - 42.jpg might need something to say about whether the clothes are copyrighted - in the US fashion apparently isn't copyrightable, but in the UK? Spot-check upon request. I don't think that The Sun is usually considered a high-quality reliable source. Wipf and Stock Publishers seems to have a speciality quite far removed from fashion? Is there a logic behind which links have ProQuest and which ones don't. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We had this conversation at the oyster dress FAC. Clothing designs are not copyrightable in the US or in the UK ([2], [3]). Nor in Canada, where that photo was taken ([4]).
Normally I wouldn't cite The Sun, but here I think it's relevant as a piece of criticism from outside the fashion world. Everyone inside the bubble is very impressed with the whole thing, but it's interesting to see someone from the outside call it a load of BS.
I've never found publisher specialty to be prohibitive when citing sources, unless it's a publisher that's unreliable on the face of things. For me, it's interesting to see analysis of fashion from a religious/theological perspective. It's a shame he didn't have more to say about The Overlook.
There's no logic, it's just whatever sources I found where I found them. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The file page still ought to say something, I think. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Overlook_(Alexander_McQueen_collection)/archive1&oldid=1216601910"