# Talk:William H. Johnson (artist)

i'm going to nominate this for GA, since the revscore indicates it.[1] i trust user:Mary Mark Ockerbloom has it in hand. Duckduckstop (talk) 20:02, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

@Duckduckstop: I haven't actually dealt with a GA before, but if you're willing to lend an eye to the process I'm game to get involved :-) Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 23:12, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I've updated the lead to be more comprehensive, and reviewed all the links cited, to ensure that they are current. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 01:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Mary Mark Ockerbloom, I thought I should let you know that Duckduckstop has just been blocked as a sockpuppet. If you'd still like to pursue this GA nomination, I'm happy to convert the nomination to be yours (there's a chance the nomination could be reverted otherwise, since edits by sockpuppets are frequently unwound). Just let me know how you'd like to proceed. (Duckduckstop nominated 17 articles in a very short period of time, and all but your two have been reverted or closed.) Don't let yourself be discouraged from pursuing the two nominations you have currently; I don't think you would have needed his help. If you do have any questions about the process, feel free to ask me. Best of luck! BlueMoonset (talk) 04:01, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi @BlueMoonset:, yes, please convert these over to me, so that they can hopefully go forward. I'm so sorry to hear that there's an issue. As I noted above, I'm not familiar with the GA process, so any advice going forward would be much appreciated. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 13:41, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay, Mary Mark Ockerbloom, this one is done, and I'll be doing the other one shortly. Right now, the reviews are at the "waiting" stage; that section and the next (What to do during a review) explain the next steps in the process, as you wait for a reviewer to select and then start reviewing your nominations against the Good Article criteria. The reviewer will typically list changes that are needed to meet the criteria, and there's back-and-forth as you make edits to improve the article accordingly and/or explain why what they have requested wouldn't accurately reflect the sources and what you propose to do instead. It can be a nicely collaborative process. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:William Johnson (artist)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 21:03, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am Carbrera, and I'll be reviewing this article for possible good article submission.
Full review coming very soon. Carbrera (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


### Pre-review comments
Before I review the entire article, I would like to say that the article contains some qualities that mirror lists. And Wikipedia is a not a list, so I would appreciate if the nominator(s) could group like information together to prevent this from appearing to me (and others of course). If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, feel free to contact me personally. I look forward to working with you! Carbrera (talk) 03:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


### Infobox
His self-portrait used in the infobox needs an alt; please add one
I see that his middle name is available, so please add "William Henry Johnson" to the birth_name section
Please fix why the "Influenced_by" section is not showing up in the infobox when the article is published
Did he win any major awards? Looks like he did in the "Recognition" section below


### Lead
#### Paragraph 1
The sentence "He married Danish textile artist Holcha Krake" seems a bit out of place at where it is currently located


#### Paragraph 2
Add a comma after "powerful folk style..." please
Should a sentence regarding his teachings at the Harlem Community Art Center be mentioned here? Let me know what you think regarding this issue


### Career
#### Paragraph 1
Remove the non-existent links to "Louise Fordham Holme" please
How did the inclusion of art in Louise Fordham Holme's curriculum help Johnson?
Why did Johnson copy the comic strips in the newspapers?


#### Paragraph 2
The sentence beginning with "He spent the late 1920s in France..." could be added to the section above (where the paragraph ends)


#### Paragraph 3
My suggestion for this has already been previously mentioned above


#### Paragraph 4
Can anything else be said about his awards for the William E. Harmon Foundation?


#### Paragraph 5
Why did Jacobia Hotel almost get him arrested?
What is significant about the YMCA exhibition mention?


#### Paragraph 6
Why did the "inter-racial couple" experience prejudice in the United States? What happened that made this happen?


#### Paragraph 7
Pretty good paragraph! :)


#### Paragraph 8
Rephrase lead/topic sentence to "In 1942, his Johnson's artwork and supplies were destroyed in a fire that occurred in his art studio;"
Rephrase second sentence to "in 1944, Johnson suffered from further loss when Holcha died from breast cancer."
No source for his death date, plus reference [10} looks stylistically awkward at its current placement


### Recognition
#### Paragraph 1
Legal guardian? What do you mean by this? Isn't Johnson an adult?


#### Paragraph 2
You don't need to list specific dates for his exhibitions towards the end of this section; they are unnecessary (the years will do just fine)


#### Paragraph 3
Put quotation marks around "American Treasures"


### End of GA Review:
Although I like the constant amount of facts used in the article, they seem to be listed rather than incorporated into the text. Yes, this problem exists throughout the entire article, but it needs to be taken care of. I am also afraid that this article could be greatly expanded, as it is relatively short yet has some great sources available. I will place the article on hold for seven days to allow these problems like this to be taken care of. Thank you. Carbrera (talk) 16:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


### Response to GA review
Hello @Carbrera:, I have followed up with the comments above.  I was able to get a copy of the Powell Homecoming which gives substantially more information than the other sources, and to expand a number of the paragraphs about which you had raised concerns. In a couple of places where I was able to expand things, I've broken one paragraph into two. Thanks so much for all your work on the review. Please let me know what my next steps on this should be. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
@Mary Mark Ockerbloom: Superb job on the expansion! I see nothing grammatically incorrect or formatted incorrectly, but I will review it once more for the GA process. Primarily, I noticed that two of the images in the article are in the same line of the article, but one is on the left side and the other is on the right side. I would recommend moving one of the images so that this is no longer an issue. I will complete my review shortly; thank you for your patience. Carbrera (talk) 21:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Done @Carbrera:, thanks for your help!  Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 14:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I apologize for my absence, I sincerely thought I had completed my review of this article. Definitely GA status now, a complete upgrade from its former state–great work! It was a pleasure working with you. Cheers, Carbrera (talk) 03:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)