Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Osbert Lancaster/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Osbert Lancaster

edit
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

.

I'm hoping to get Osbert Lancaster's article to FA. Experts in WP's image policies have kindly been helping me on the matter of non-free images, and although any further comments about the images will be welcome, what I'm primarily after here are suggestions for improving the prose. Structure, balance, phrasing – anything, really. It has been interesting, but not without problems of coherence and chronology, to write about someone who had three different careers at the same time: popular cartoonist, stage designer, and architectural historian and polemicist. I want to do him justice on all three, and on him as a person, too. All comments gratefully received. Tim riley talk 01:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Nikkimaria

edit
  • Not clear what is meant in the lead by "conventional education"
  • "Clare Lancaster was an artist who had exhibited regularly at the Royal Academy, known for her paintings of flowers" - suggest moving the flowers earlier, before the exhibitions
  • Not clear what is meant by "bloods"
    • Note added. Parenthetically, this use of the word is thought by some to be where the emphatic "bloody" comes from: "bloody drunk" as in as drunk as a dissolute man-about-town. The OED is not wild about this theory. Tim riley talk 12:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "When his police fired on a civilian demonstration, in full view of the international press, British support for him came under intense pressure from politicians and journalists in London, the US and elsewhere" - is there an article on this topic?

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for these points, Nikkimaria. All ad rem and all addressed, satisfactorily I hope. Tim riley talk 12:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wehwalt

edit

Can't say I'm familiar with the gentleman, but always happy to learn. Very little to criticise.

  • "popular in the French press but not, so far, seen in British papers." I would eliminate the commas and possibly change " so far" to "until then".
  • "At first they were also cautious about his suitability as a husband and provider, although they quickly came to approve of him.[29]" I would cut the "also". It isn't necessary.
  • "Fearing a communist takeover, the British government supported Georgios Papandreou, prime minister of the government-in-exile, now precariously restored to power, backed by British troops.[51] Papandreou had not led a pre-war government, so if "restored to power" is read to refer to him (it is ambiguous) ...
  • "The gardens attracted about eight million visitors from Britain and overseas during the duration of the festival in the summer and autumn of 1951.[64] " I might cut "duration of the", possibly adding if you do ", held" before "in".
  • "The 1951 Festival of Britain gave Lancaster two new opportunities to expand his artistic scope. First, despite the hostility to the festival shown by his main employer, Beaverbrook, Lancaster was a major contributor.[62]" I might cut "two" and "First," I'm not really sure they add much.
  • "Harold Nicolson said of Lancaster's work in this sphere, "Under that silken, sardonic smile there lies the seal of an ardent reformer".[89] of Lancaster's books are in this category:" issue regarding the full stop after "reformer".
  • "As at 2018 only two of Lancaster's theatre designs are in use in current productions, both by the Royal Ballet: Pineapple Poll and La fille mal gardée." I wonder how this is adequately sourced by a 2016 reference?
  • "Lancaster's prose style divided opinion. Some, including Betjeman, teased him that it was "deliciously convoluted";[57] Beaverbrook's right-hand man, George Malcolm Thompson said of Lancaster, "The annoying thing at the Express was that he was not only the only one who could draw; he could also write better than anyone in the building."[110]" I'm not sure about the semicolon here, it might better be a full stop as the sentence seems a bit unbalanced. Possibly then the full stop after "opinion" might be a colon or semicolon.
That's about it, and some barrel bottom scraping I suspect needed to have that much bulk. Looking forward and all that.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You have an unnerving knack of homing in on all the drafting points that I've not been quite happy with while I was drafting them. I shall have much pleasure in and benefit from working through the above points and reporting back. Thank you, Wehwalt! Tim riley talk 17:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
All addressed, and the drafting is decidedly improved thereby. Thank you, Wehwalt! Tim riley talk 21:37, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John

edit

It's a super article! Very little I could improve on my first pass.

  • I query "encapsulation" in the Reputation section.
Gone. Tim riley talk 11:48, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The long quotes are very good but I wonder if they're the best way to end the article. I'm not sure what I would do to address these.
This section definitely needs more work before FAC. Your comment taken on board. Tim riley talk 11:48, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know you're more interested in prose for the moment, but I think File:Osbert-Lancaster-fille-mal-gardée.jpg should be smaller and File:Osbert-Lancaster-cover.jpg should be bigger; rationale, he was more known as a cartoonist than as a set designer. I also think the latter is a more interesting image than the former. --John (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'll make a point of asking for comments on this aspect either during this review or at FAC. Thank you for your comments here. Tim riley talk 11:48, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Later: Fille mal gardée image reduced a bit. Shall wait to see if others think the Littlehampton picture should be larger. Tim riley talk 17:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil

edit

This is an excellent overview, which I am very much enjoying reading through. Hope these are helpful.

lead

  • The structure of the lead isn't right; first para should be a claim of notability and a broad stylistic overview (eg the "aiming to amuse" sentence); the second a bio sketch, the third more subjective with some accolades.
  • In 1938 Lancaster was invited to contribute topical cartoons to - "Invited" is too much to soon, maybe just "From 1938 Lancaster contributed". Because I'm a Paddy, I never remember why a comma after "From 1938" is shocking bad taste, or the height of refinment.
    • You are possibly caught in the cross-fire between AmE and BrE: in the former a comma, though grammatically unnecessary, is customary. In BrE we use a comma when it helps the reader and don't when it doesn't. My stock examples are "On Monday I went shopping" which doesn't benefit from the gratuitous comma, and "When reading Joyce, Beckett was excited", where the absence of a comma could momentarily have the reader wondering who Joyce Beckett was. Tim riley talk 12:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Have saved this diff, and now more inclined towards comma sparsity. Ceoil (talk)

Early years

  • There he was shocked by the bullying and bad language, but in addition to its sporty, philistine "bloods",[n 1] the school had an intellectual and aesthetic tradition - the sentence begins with a subjective POV, but ends with a general claim; maybe add "accepted" or "found that" before "...the school". There is an attribution issue here.

1930s "shocked" is not part of the words I'm asking for work on. Ceoil (talk) 12:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lancaster's family opposed his wish to earn his living as an artist - Can you rephrase "his wish" and "earn his living" more along the lines of that they "disapproved of his artistic ambitions", and the later 'urged him to peruse a career in law'. "Dutifully" sounds slightly dated, and maybe "crammer" should just described as the less parochial Cram school.
    • Yes, this creaks a bit, and I'll revisit it. I'll stick with "crammer", though, as it's what the sources say and is the term used in the OED. I have never heard or seen the term "cram school" till I looked for the WP article to link to. Possibly an Americanism. Tim riley talk 12:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Later years

  • Although great gardens such as Stowe were given full coverage, her text and his drawings did not neglect more modest efforts - "Covered both great and more modest gardens". Not my area, is there a blue link for "great", or is it a more of a "famed" thing. Obv the key is "her text and his drawings", and the breath of their interest; frame the sentence so this stands out.
    • There is a better link. I had it there in an earlier draft and then mucked it up when using the dab tool. I'll restore it.
  • Boston comments that after the dramatic events in Athens his subject's later life was, from a biographer's point of view, regrettably uneventful. - "his subject" = Lancaster, "from a biographer's point of view" - unnecessary, its probably objectively so; "regrettably uneventful" is wonderful phrasing. Also "Boston comments" reads weird somehow, maybe Boston notes.
    • I'll look at this, but I make a point of avoiding "notes" when retailing a source's opinions. "Notes" has, to me, the implication that one is reporting an undisputed fact rather than someone's views. Tim riley talk 12:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

World War Two

Reputation

  • I don't find this satisfying yet, as it is essentially quotes from two obits. Would expect to see the sect detail how his reputation has changed from them to now, how and with which audience he has endured, his place and weight in the continuum, etc.
Ceoil (talk) 01:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Ceoil. Much food for thought there. Tim riley talk 12:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Its always a pleasure to review high quality articles such as this. Ceoil (talk) 12:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked through your comments, and acted on most of them. In particular I've beefed up the Reputation section. I hope I haven't overdone it, but I can prune if necessary. Thanks again for your thoughts: the article is decidedly stronger for them. Tim riley talk 13:38, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The "reputation" section added today is very strong, and would now support this at FAC. My only niggle is should the header "Theatre design" be "Stage design". I get that its not just props, but also costume etc, but theater design scanned as architectural initially. Ceoil (talk) 19:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, and done. Tim riley talk 23:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SchroCat

edit

In excellent shape as it stands, but some minor points to consider:

1930s
  • In "Cara (born 1934) and William (b. 1938)", why one born and one b?
  • Link The Observer? (as other papers are)
SWW
  • Link The Times?
Architectural history
  • "military ruled Greece": slightly inelegant, but if it remains, shouldn't there be a hyphen somewhere in the mix?
  • I agree with Ceoil about the Rep section needing a bit more oomph, if there is anything in the sources.

Please ping me when you go to FAC. Pip pip - SchroCat (talk) 21:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All attended to (except The Times, which was already linked earlier at first appearance). Thanks for the input, and I'll most certainly ping you when I go to FAC. Tim riley talk 13:38, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BB

edit

Just a few comments/suggestions concerning this excellent article.

  • Lead image. With due respect I think this is a poor choice. If it was a free image you might have no choice but to use it, but as it's under a non-free fair use licence, why not go for a much better one? For example, this one, from House and Gardens. The problems with the present image include size, the fact that Osbert isn't the dominant one of the pair in the photograph, and finally, that the two men look ALARMINGLY alike – Lloyd albeit a somewhat younger version. If you feel you have no choice other than to use this image, then I advise that you get a techie to crop Lloyd out (I used to do this myself, but when I changed laptops the software changed and I can no longer do it), and increase the size.
  • We usually mention the Oxbridge college in the lead, in this case Lincoln I think.
  • I've pestered you before about including something about when Lancaster and Guy Burgess worked together in the FO News Department, This, according to Burgess's biographer Andrew Lownie, is how Lancaster described Burgess: "Disastrous, unadulterated hell. A fabulous drunk. Very intelligent until six in the evening. He had charm and had been very good looking, but the booze had done its work. When he was in his cups he made no bones about working for the Russians". There may be a worthwhile anecdote there. If you want, you can pick up the details of the Lownie book from the Burgess article; the page ref is 146.
But have now expanded a little, with the Lownie quote. Tim riley talk 23:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for overlooking the note. It looks fine. Brianboulton (talk) 17:38, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My co-reviewers seem have done a thorough job on the nitty-gritty, so I'll leave it at that, and perhaps add a few words when the article comes to FAC which it surely must. Brianboulton (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, BB. I'll ping you when I'm going to FAC. I have, in sober truth, missed collaborating with you on the article, as we'd originally planned. A quotation (date, 1926) about an absent collaborator comes to mind, which you are invited to identify without cribbing: "I think of it as it should have been, with its prolixities docked, its dullnesses enlivened, its fads eliminated, its truths multiplied." Quite so. – Tim riley talk 16:35, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your suggestions above now attended to. Tim riley talk 17:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing review

edit

Many thanks to all, above, for input. Greatly appreciated. Onward to FAC now. Tim riley talk 09:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Osbert_Lancaster/archive1&oldid=1136084856"