Talk:Ecce Homo (Caravaggio, Madrid)/GA1

GA Review

Unsuccessful. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: That Tired Tarantula (talk · contribs) 14:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 21:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A nice little article. Some content suggestions, then image review and sourcing:

When using c. for circa, it's best to use the {{circa}} template, which adds a mouseover and sorts the formatting out.
We introduce quite a lot of people in this article -- at the moment, modern scholars get introductions (Maria Cristina Terzaghi, an art history professor at Roma Tre University), but historical figures don't. I would make this consistent: explain briefly who e.g. Manuel Godoy was.
I think it would be wise to explain what the ecce homo is in the lead, as well as the body, per MOS:LEAD.
It would be useful to have pictures of some of the works with which we are asked to compare this one, such as Salome with the Head of John the Baptist
Art historian Kolja Thurner: as far as I can tell, Thurner is "only" a graduate student, and the remarks cited were made on X/Twitter. We wouldn't normally accept social media as a reliable source: bluntly, can we come up with a source with more academic chops to make this point?
It would be useful to put an inflation template on the auction value, so that it remains current as time goes on (WP:ENDURE).
It is now mainly attributed to Caravaggio, an Italian painter who died in 1610: can we give an idea of when the change took place? We imply above that it was post-2021, but cite a 2003 source to prove this point, so something is missing.

Image review

The licence on File:Ecce homo(Caravaggio).jpg isn't right -- only the copyright holder can release it under a Creative Commons licence, and Caravaggio clearly didn't do that. It should be fairly straightforward to sort out an appropriate licence under {{PD-Art}}: let me know if you want more of a steer on how to do that.
The image should have alt text for accessibility, per MOS:ALT.

Sourcing

Almost all of the sources are news websites -- this isn't a huge problem, but it would be reassuring to see some more academic sources. A lot of the time, we are quoting a scholar's ideas at second hand (as they are reported in e.g. the BBC): can you do some digging and find the original scholarly works?
Some of the formatting is inconsistent -- check how the BBC is cited, for example.
It's advisable to create archive links to online sources to prevent link rot.
Spot checks to follow once the above is sorted.

UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 21:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks! I will work on it more today and tomorrow. I'll try to find some more academic sources; it's just been hard because the vast majority of the information comes from news articles since it's been discovered rather recently. I'll let you know about how finding more information goes and will try to add in more sources if I can find them. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 01:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@That Tired Tarantula: did you get anywhere with this? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have gone stale, and I notice that the nominator has not been active for over a month. Closing: I hope these comments may be useful in the future. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry; I only just noticed this today. I was planning to work on the article more, but about a month ago, my computer at home broke; I couldn't access my account for a while, and I got sidetracked. I am not asking for this to be re-opened or anything; I just wanted to say how I am sorry for having not been able to work on the article more during the GA. Thank you so much for your patience and your feedback. Your advice was very helpful for me to learn how I could make better articles in the future and improve this one. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 19:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite alright: I hope the comments will still be useful. Obviously, each GA reviewer is a law unto themselves, but I imagine that the article would have a very easy ride through a future GA nomination if all of the above were done. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 06:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're very helpful and I'll work on the article some more in the future. Thanks again! That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 00:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.