Talk:John Michael Wright

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

John Michael Wright is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.

An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on January 3, 2008.

January 30, 2008

Featured article candidate

Promoted

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

[edit] Comments

This article looks very good to me. My comments are going to sound very picky, but that is only because I know you are going to FAC and I know how picky reviewers there can be. Best to get that out of the way, eh?

I assume we don't have exact birth and death dates for Wright? Is there a way to indicate that? Should there be a footnote making that clear in the lead?

no we don't and now done--Doc^g 20:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I would spend a day reviewing the manual of style. When an article is as good as this one is, reviewers will start to pick at the MOS "violations", as they have started to say. Here is a little list of things that my practiced eye saw right away (and I'm not even a MOS guru!):

Wright is rated as one of the leading indigenous British painters of his generation, with a distinctive realism in his portraiture. - Rated by whom? Contemporaries or scholars or...? And is he rated as leading painter because of his realism? The sentence suggests that, but does not make it explicit.

fixed.--Doc^g 20:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

After the Restoration of 1660, Wright's Roman Catholicism became less of a handicap. - add a clause explaining why

fixed.--Doc^g 20:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The images in the article are lovely, but there may be too many in the "England" section (see WP:MOS#Images for advice about placement). You might think about a gallery instead and also include one or two of the images from the "Artistic legacy" section.

I would suggest formatting the "References" in a recognizable style like Chicago or MLA.

This was a fascinating article to read! Thanks so much for writing it. I'm sorry that I don't have more to contribute. Awadewit | talk 16:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this - picky is exactly what I wanted, and I will work through of all of this, although bringing myself up to speed on the MOS may take a little time. Much obliged for your time.--Doc^g 18:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)