# Talk:Art in modern Scotland

This review is transcluded from Talk:Art in modern Scotland/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Yash! (talk · contribs) 21:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I will give my initial comments by tomorrow. Thanks! — Yash! [talk] 21:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks for taking this on.--SabreBD (talk) 23:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


### Lead
Art in modern Scotland includes all aspects of the visual arts in Scotland - Art in modern Scotland includes all aspects of the visual arts in the country  Done
What does 'work of the Four mean?'  Done
major artists, including - artists, such as  Done
Best to not use words like 'successful'  Done
Scotland possess significant collections of art, such as the - Scotland has significant collections of art at places like  Done
Linking Edinburgh and Glasgow would be better for a reader who would like to read about those cities  Done
Significant schools - Prominent schools. Since you use 'significant' in the previous sentence.  Done
The major funding body with responsibility for the arts in Scotland is Creative Scotland. Support is also given by local councils and independent foundations. -  Done
The major funding body responsible for the arts in Scotland is Creative Scotland, with support from local councils and independent foundations as well.  Done
I have one last exam tomorrow, after which I will review the rest of the article. Thanks for waiting! — Yash! [talk] 17:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I have implemented these so far, except the last one, which is a bit of a run on sentence. What is the problem with the original here, because it seems clear and grammatical to me?--SabreBD (talk) 18:44, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


### Early twentieth century
link 'Celtic Revival'  Done
helped define - defined - well no that is what the text says - too much credit to say they defined it.
'knew each other and' - no need to include that. - I think there is - it cannot be implied by the rest of the sentence.
and all looked - and looked  Done
"They were John D..." - better to introduce them when you first mention them.  Done
They have been described - They were described - this is not contemporary description.
would be a - was a  Done
link 'First WW'  Done
They were influenced by French painters and the St. Ives School[6] and their art was characterised by use of vivid and often non-naturalistic colour and the use of bold technique above form. - too much 'and'  Done
better to be consistent: use Fergusson instead of J.D. Fergusson  Done
Don't use words such as 'probably'. If it is not certain, better to remove that part Sometimes things are not certain, but still worth mentioning.
link for 'vorticism'?  Done
while a student - as a student  Done
remove 'strongly'  Done
who was in Dundee and who in Montrose? The word "respective" is in this sentence.
link for surrealism?  Done
and the work of Bruegel and - use something other than 'and' for the second time  Done
 J.D. Fergusson should be Fergusson  Done
Link Second WW  Done
remove 'had no single style, but' Why? - seems important to say this.
remove 'strongly'  Done
resident in - resident of - clarified
whose produced illustrations for the work of Robert Louis Stevenson and Paul Strand (1890-1976), who produced atmospheric depictions of Hebridean landscapes. - whose and who sound odd. Better to rephrase it.  Done
Will review the remaining article later today. Thanks! — Yash! [talk] 08:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


### References and images
Please add WP:ALT to the images. You know this is a FA not a GA requirement - right?
Yeah but i always bring that up at my GARs. What's the loss in adding it? — Yash! [talk] 21:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Scotsman.com should not be in italics Do you have a link to the MOS for this one. This seems to be quite correct in many guides outside Wikipedia, but I have not found anything internally. Also seems to implied as correct since templates italicise this.
I read in some GA review that anything that is not printed should not be in italics. I am not able to find that review though. — Yash! [talk] 15:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
There is no need to include full reference that are in 'Notes', in 'Bibliography' as well - This article uses a short title for repeat refs, but full for the first instance.
guardian.co.uk - The Guardian. Also link it.  Done
Everything looks fine here! — Yash! [talk] 10:12, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


### Later twentieth century to the present
Post-War - Post-war  Done
Better to not use words like 'highly influential'  Done
Barns-Graham (b. 1912-2004) and Margaret Mellis (b. 1914-2009) - Remove 'b.'   Done
Also a visitor to Paris was Alan Davie (b. 1920),[24] who was influenced by jazz and Zen Buddhism and moved further into abstract expressionism. - Also a visitor to Paris was Alan Davie (b. 1920),[24] who was influenced by jazz and Zen Buddhism, moved further into abstract expressionism.   Done
both grouped - grouped  Done
Scottish Realism or Scottish realism? Please be consistent   Done
better to introduce the pups in the start, preferably after 'and the Glasgow School of Art'    Done
has a comic book-like quality and puts - had a comic-like quality and put   Done
Currie has revived - Currie revived   Done
Important - Notable   Done
who have received - who received - We are in the present tense now.
 However, he has received little acclaim from critics. -  However, he received little acclaim from critics.  Also in the present tense now.


### Institutions
National Museum of Scotland, - remove the ','   Done
I am not sure if 'the' should be used in 'from the decorative arts'. Probably it should not be there. It looks right to me - we would talk about "the arts" not "arts". See also the opening sentence of Decorative arts.
If NGS and SNGMA have national and International collections, then best to combine those sentences - Except one is modern and one not - so I cannot see how to express that as being the same.
Glasgow galleries - start that from a new paragraph  Done
the new Millennium - please write that in years  Done
has had - had - they did not stop having them - continuous past tense is correct.
in the city in 1760 and was established in 1907 - in the city in 1760, was established in 1907 - clarified
This wraps it up. Thanks for writing the article! — Yash! [talk] 06:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

OK I have implemented all I can without in some way changing the meaning of what is said. Everything I have just done is marked with a  Done.--SabreBD (talk) 14:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


### Result
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Everything looks in order. Passing it. — Yash! [talk] 21:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for all your effort on this.--SabreBD (talk) 22:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

May I suggest the addition of leading contemporary printmakers Barbara Rae and Elizabeth Blackadder to the 'Later twentieth century to the present' section, perhaps under a new 'printmaking' heading?
The prestigious Glasgow Print Studio and Edinburgh Printmakers could also be included?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by NovaBlueWave (talk • contribs) 11:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)