This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
After reviewing this article I find it to meet the criteria of a B class article. To go higher it needs a peer review. The translation German was fairly well done and the recent cleanup helped this English version. Good Work! Jrcrin001 (talk) 16:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I will respond to the points raised by the copyeditor User:Acabashi on my talk page:
Hi, I’m currently copyediting the Wilhelm Busch page that you requested a look at on the Guild of Copyeditors request page, here. I am on my way to completing this but I need your input on various aspects and clarifications so that we can make the article look reasonable, so I’ll itemize from how the article is set-out right now - things soon might be moved about a bit by the time you see it because it needs section re-structuring, so presently:
Under “Munich” it says that he “disrupted a vaudeville and made a scene in front of the subsequent togetherness with his family, a behaviour caused by alcohol.” What is this vaudeville – is it a particular show, or is it a theatre. I’ve changed it to variety show, but this may not be right. The German Wiki shows it as “Varietébesuches mit der Familie von Lenbach” (raw translation: Variety visit with the family Spranger) There is an artist called Franz von Lenbach. Was Brusch’s family really with him at this event ?
Yes, variety show is a better formulation.--Tomcat(7) 11:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Under “Antisemitism” there is a floating sentence copyedited to: “Although he[who?] felt that Jews were for Busch alien, the Jewish conductor Hermann Levi befriended him, suggesting that Busch had a slight bias towards Jews”. Who is the person who felt this ?
Under "'Moritzian' influence" - "GDR satire magazine Eulenspiegel caricatured black labour" needs adding to - carricatured with what ? "In 1969 Max und Moritz 'participated' at a student moving." - how was this done ? - was it a "student movement" of some kind - if so, what ?
Done the second.--Tomcat(7) 08:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Under “Painting” there are 3 items.:
1. “poorly-prepared spruce-wood boards, which were secured by only one dovetail key.[clarification needed]” I’m assuming that means just one wedge in one of the frame corners on the reverse, but if it is, it doesn’t seem worth mentioning such a detail – does it mean something else ?
I think your description is correct, but I am not an expert.--Tomcat(7) 09:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
2. ”He dismissed the techniques of Impressionism, such as heavier light,[clarification needed” ‘Heavier’ light ? – odd description for impressionism – is it their "strong preoccupation with the effect of light" – do you know what 'heavier' means here ?
In the German article it states "the discovery of light". I reworded per your suggestion.--Tomcat(7) 09:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
3. Busch dissociated from prominence.[clarification needed] Prominence ? – does this mean ‘public view’, or ‘success’, or what ?
Perhaps "hype"?--Tomcat(7) 08:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I misread your comment. I reworded that phrase.--Tomcat(7) 09:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Further, I am unsure about the term "picture stories" used throughout the article. It seems to be a mechanical translation from the German, and doesn't ring true in an English article. I have changed it to "illustrated tales". 'Tales' is better than 'stories' here. Stories can imply something of long length, and tales has the English implication of being short, and having the nature of morality or fable - and as in the English term for such things: "cautionary tale".
3. Broad in coverage?: Covers broad aspects quite well.
4. Neutral point of view?: Written in a neutral tone and matter of fact language and presentation, satisfying NPOV.
5. Article stability? Other than IP vandalism to keep an eye out for, article and article talk page are stable upon inspection going back over one month.
6. Images?: A total of ninteeen (19) images used. Some will need more date info and other fields filled out on their individual image pages for a FAC image review, but all are confirmed as free-use licensed and check out alright for GA status. Please go back through those image pages on Wikimedia Commons and make sure as many fields as possible are filled out on the individual image pages for commons:Template:Information.
Great job overall. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— — Cirt (talk) 23:23, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks and regards.--Tomcat(7) 18:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
The "Painting" subsection uses the floating text: "He disliked the work of contemporary German painters Adolf Menzel, Arnold Böcklin, Wilhelm Leibl and Anselm Feuerbach". It would be useful for the article to clarify what he disliked about their work. Although an earlier edit called these artists "German Impressionists", which would link with the section's existing lead-up sentence, they each were not, in entirety, Impressionists, and were variously and at different times exponents of Post-Impressionism, Realism, and German Expressionism. Acabashi (talk) 13:27, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't have those books, and they are not available online, so I'll remove that sentence.--Tomcat(7) 12:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)