Wikipedia:Peer review/George Vincent (painter)/archive2

George Vincent (painter)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I intend it to become an FAC. I've worked on a similar article recently and with help it became an FA—and I want to see if the process this time round can go more smoothly now that I've been through it once before.

Thanks, Amitchell125 (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE, when you close this peer review, please be sure to remove it from Template:FAC peer review sidebar. If FA regulars have to do all the maintenance, they may stop following that very useful sidebar :) Good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:45, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SG review

I fixed some MOS-y things, saw a cn tag, and left an edit summary reminder to check ref order. I will read more as I have time, and after others have looked at prose. This is confusing:

Vincent exhibited 9 works at the Royal Academy,[52] 41 at the British Institution (yearly from 1815 to 1831, except 1816 and 1828),[53]

I suppose he exhibited yearly, not that he exhibited 41 yearly. Maybe that can be split out somewhere. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see some WP:OVERLINKing, for example, surgeon and debt are common words known to most English speakers, and readers are unlikely to need to click those links. Please review throughout. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted (found a few others). Amitchell125 (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aza24

I'm not sure that "He is considered by art historians to be" is even necessary, "Considered to be one..." would probably suffice. Such a clarification may be appropriate for a high profile figure like Michelangelo or van Gogh – where critical and public opinion are equally well represented – but probably not for Vincent.

Happy with that. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the lovely Edward Thomas Daniell can be added in the Background list of finest artists? Although if the refs don't support this then of course ignore this comment.

Not a problem, as he was the school's best etcher. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:57, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps consider mentioning that George had no siblings? (e.g. "He had no siblings; two years earlier his older...")

As it's possible that there were older children from the marriage not mentioned in the sources, it's best avoided. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:14, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

these are just some random things, I'll come back soon for more thorough/extensive comments Aza24 (talk) 08:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree with the comment below that "a surgeon named Benjamin Steel" is somewhat awkward phrasing, perhaps a compromise could be "and Benjamin Steel, a surgeon who was to marry..."? Not a huge deal either way of course

Amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

" was painted as a result of the journey to Paris and is the only painting produced from this visit" may be simpler along the lines of "was painted in Paris, and is the only painting produced from this visit" – since surely as a landscape paper the "as a result of" is implied?

Sentence amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stray period after British Instituion – I wonder if a semi colon might work better here anyways "...the British Institution; Vincent and Stark both attended..."

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"studied would probably have included" may be more to the point as "studied probably included"

Done Amitchell125 (talk) 05:30, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cuyp is missing the link the first time (should be full name here) and is double linked later in the article.

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"that were available for viewing by the public" is unnecessary – implied that they could only be influenced by ones they had access to (especially since the next line explains this)

Agreed, done. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So did Stark return back to Norfolk before he went to the funeral? "having travelled to Norfolk from London" makes it sound like he did, just checking

Hopefully it sounds right now, I don't think Stark returned to London again before the funeral. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:46, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These links exist, not sure if they're the right people: Richard Redgrave and Samuel Redgrave – Bedford Square has a link as well

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"intemperance" – is this in reference to his drinking? Could potentially be clarified like "drinking intemperance"

It's alcohol-related, now linked. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to raise funds" for himself or the prison?

Clarification provided. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"architectural works" – I'm assuming these are designs, maybe just say that then

In this context, architectural works are accurate drawn pictures, usually of interesting old buildings, e.g. this. Amended slightly. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"James Stark" is used a couple times throughout, surely besides the first these can all be just "Stark"?

Done, with the odd exception. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure Harold Day needs to be listed as an art historian and author, given that every art historian mentioned so far could be listed as an author, since well, we're citing their books :)

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The dates for Ruisdael seem random since you haven't been giving them for other figures – not a huge deal though

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Searle has a link: G. R. Searle

Many thanks! Amitchell125 (talk) 06:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

missing period after "steer clear of these picturesque contrivances" I think

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not that there's any lack of information or sourcing but Grove has a small article on him that I thought I'd point out in case it has anything you find worth adding

Thanks. It's written by Andrew Moore, so there's probably little new to add, but I'll to access it to have a look. Amitchell125 (talk) 05:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got through the life section, I'll leave comments on the rest later. Everything is looking good so far, and it goes without saying that my comments are extremely nitpicky, especially since I know this will be going to FAC! Aza24 (talk) 03:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Herbert Minton Cundall is referred to as an author in the lead and art historian in the text, I would stick with art historian both times

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:22, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Scottish scenes" – but he never went to Scotland (unless I missed this in the article)? Is there missing context here?

It was in the article, but I've amended the sentence a bit to avoid having to search for it). Amitchell125 (talk) 08:25, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Totally up to you but perhaps an image in the legacy section? Chrome's A Fishmarket at Boulogne would be nice or perhaps Road Scene and Cottage since this is Vincent's article after all, not Chrome's

Good idea, thanks. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"latest version" should probably be altered since a new version will inevitably be released at some point in the future

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The more I'm reading, the more it makes sense to include an image of Road Scene and Cottage – it perfectly illustrates all of Walpole's points

Agreed. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:33, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The impact of the Norwich School outside East Anglia was based largely upon the works of Vincent and Stark" seems like a huge piece of his reputation – perhaps include in the lead?

Done, as i was trying to think of a way to include stark in the lead. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:40, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wait is the Greenwich Hospital in "Greenwich Hospital was originally commissioned..." in reference to the Greenwich Hospital from the River? Before I realized there's another Greenwich Hospital, I thought you had shortened it and it reminded me of the extraordinary full title of this amazing painting and this Dali which always makes me chuckle... but anyways the name here is not clear if it's a seperate painting or a shortened name

Oops, now sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

was View on the Wensum painted in the same year or should it have a year in parenthesis?

Sentence amended to reflect that only the exhibition and purchase date is known. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:11, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well Stourton, Staffordshire has a section on Stourton Castle you could link do but that may be unnecessary

Added, as it's a useful link—I'm it's no coincidence that the property was later occupied by William Orme Foster, who owned the painting after Fordham. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:17, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Years in parenthesis for Portrait of George Vincent (1796–1832), with landscape background by himself and Trowse Meadows, near Norwich?

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I glanced through the refs/sources – everything looks fine. The only thing I saw was that ref 72 is missing a retrieval date and refs 22–23 could probably use them too

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:33, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I got – I must say I adore A Harbour Scene in the Isle of Wight, Looking Towards the Needles and St. Paul's from the Surrey Side of Blackfriars Bridge, figures and sailing barges in the foreground.... Aza24 (talk) 06:53, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your comments, Aza24. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:33, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

btw, there is now a template (Template:FAC peer review sidebar) for peer reviews of future FACs you may want to list this article on. Aza24 (talk) 00:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Some comments from me based on a quick read!

"afterwards apprenticed to Crome" - might just be me, but is there a way to express this without using "apprenticed" as a verb? eg. worked for Crome, became Crome's apprentice, etc. (same again under Early adulthood)

Apprentice is a verb. [1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
what's wrong with apprenticed? Archaic today, but it certainly fits the period. Retired electrician (talk) 00:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a surgeon named Benjamin Steel" - can we just write 'surgeon Benjamin Steel'?

I'd prefer it written as it is, as imo your suggestion sounds as if Steel was well known.Amitchell125 (talk) 06:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"~~the~~ physician James Cugnoni" - 'the' is redundant.

It isn't in British English. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"3rd Gallery (i.e. on the third floor)" - is it necessary to write 3rd gallery, can we just write third floor?

I'd like to keep gallery. This notorious prison was organised in a particular way, with floors that were called "galleries", each allocated to particular kinds of debtors (see here for more information. The source says '3rd Gallery', other sources don't have the capital letter. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Vincent revealed his embarrassment upon being imprisoned in a letter to Davey written in December 1824" - might be able to simplify this, eg. Upon his imprisonment, Vincent revealed his embarrassment in a letter to Davey ...

Sentence amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"name it to J.S." - who's J.S., do we need to put in [square brackets] who it is?

James Stark—now added. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"After 1831" - 'from 1831'?

I think After is preferable here. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a total of 106" - prose redundancy - remove 'a total of'.

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a total of 41" - same as above.

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the "Artistic career" section under its own heading? Shouldn't this be with the "Life" section to make it flow chronologically?

Good idea, imo it looks better now. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Selected paintings" section - because you've only got the names of two pieces of work here, is it necessary to give them sub-headings? The "A distant view..." heading is also long and widening the contents table. Is it possible to merge "Selected paintings" with "Gallery"? Thanks, L150 22:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sections merged as suggested. However, I'd rather not amend the titles for the paintings past removing the dates. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Had another look, and went largely with your suggestion. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I think the structure is better, however, you may need to jiggle the "Artistic career" section to make it flow in order of time. The preceding section "Marriage and subsequent decline", talks about his imprisonment which ended in 1827. Then it goes into "Artistic career" which talks about his exhibits in 1811, 1820 etc. The paragraph "In 1824 he started to prepare two pictures..", among others, now needs to come in earlier. Thanks L150 19:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, and thanks for your input. I'll print it out and look at it that way, as it's harder doing it all using a screen. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology sorted out. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]