Talk:John Bauer (illustrator)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Travelling

It is said that Bauer was considering travelling by train instead of a ferry, but ironically reconsidered as he regarded it as an unsafe means of transport.

This needs to be checked up with a reference added. --213.100.253.219 20:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Done, the Swedish wikipedia even has a pretty nice article on the train accIdent that deterred him. I don't know if it's noteworthy enough to be translated, though. -Obli (Talk)^? 22:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Charcuterie

In Sweden? Would delicatessen be more accurate? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm from sweden, and the word is "Charkuteri" in Swedish, and the english form is at least "charcuterie" and "pork butcher's shop". Source: http://lexin2.nada.kth.se/cgi-bin/swe-eng

Regarding John Bauers pictures

The names of these paintings (and therefore also the file names) are actually exact quotations from the section of the story they are illustrating. I just translated them and formatted them correctly. These quotes/names are a part of the Swedish cultural heritage and I think it only proper that they should be done right. - W.carter (talk) 22:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

@Krenakarore: In the article as well as in the caption at the picture the translation is that Tuvstarr gazes down into "the fishpond". I would suggest this should be altered to "the forest tarn". A fishpond is usually something artificial and contains fish but a forest tarn is something natural and usually contains no fish at all. The words "forest tarn" is also used in the file name of the picture and is the official name of the picture. - W.carter (talk) 09:36, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

@EditorInTheRye: Yes I know how to do it, but I have noticed that this article is very well guarded, and since I am still a newbie I thought it might be polite to explain my edit in case there are any objections. - W.carter (talk) 11:21, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

@W.carter: Your suggestion goes straight to the point. No need to justify whatever, just briefly explain your move so that everybody knows what you mean. There is no such thing here as "permission to do whatever" once this is a free encyclopedia ! You can turn the article inside out if you want, as long as you improve it the way that you did before by keeping it clean and in order. The readers out there say: Thank you Mr. Carter :) ! Krenakarore ^TK 13:47, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Quite a lot of pictures were removed by an IP vandal. Added them again. Don't know if your captions work now. Hafspajen (talk) 10:16, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

How about this one for a compromise?

The kind of gallery used it is a bit awkward when it comes with long captions... Also the size is to small now that the pictures can be wieved properly. Using width=250 together with height=120 makes a gallery that leaves a lot of empty space unused. This one has a header, that means it will not be necessary to add "Illustrations from the childrens' anthology Among pixies and trolls all the time. Reduced the size a bit, from 200px (as it was in the article before the vandalism) to 180px. And I added Carter's captions back. How about this then? Also in general one tries to avoid placing a picture BEFORE a title, it would be better to have Princess Tuvstarr gazing in the pond to right size not left, and use thumb or little bigger then thumb size. Move right. Hope that I get a response soon. Hafspajen (talk) 13:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

As I said, it's good to work with people of common sense and a sense of compromise to the readers out there. Your considerations go straight to the point and make the article even better than it was. Thank you Mr. Halfspajen, it feels good to work with you. How about 3 more pics to fill out the third row ? Krenakarore ^TK 13:22, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, move in this one. Hafspajen (talk) 13:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

A big thank you to Hafspajen for additional editing of the text and for reverting vandalism, and to Krenakarore for fixing the gallery. As soon as you are finished I'll take a look at the captions of the old and the new pictures to see if there is anything to add. Best, - W.carter (talk) 14:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

OK. Hafspajen (talk) 14:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

There are four more pics there Mr. Carter. Can you do the honor please and see if you can fill in the missing parts ? Thanks, Krenakarore ^TK 14:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Can we please just work one at the time on the gallery, please. I am loking for more pictures, and you said you leave it to me, Krenakarore. You said so yourself. Some of it you added found too, will add - thoug better files. And Illustrations from the childrens' anthology Among pixies and trolls is fairly well displayed and complete. Hafspajen (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

You're losing your temper Mr. No blank spaces, please. Krenakarore ^TK 14:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

One has to think about the art critics.

I will gladly take a look at the new pictures and all. I'll just wait until the dust from your work has settled down a bit. We are all fond of this article and only want what it best for it, but one more editor right now would just cause a mess. So, the article is not forgotten even if my input will be in a day or so. Best, - W.carter (talk) 14:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Trolls and Princess Tuvstarr.

I am working in a separate sandbox, one can't have a lot of ? ? ? in the article while it has eyes on it. The article is under revision, because of the nomination . And I liked the ones you found. Just reverted to a stable version. Hafspajen (talk) 14:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I envy your serenity Mr. Carter :) ! Yes, Wiki is always an ongoing changing process, as we know well ! Krenakarore ^TK 14:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, I didn't really understand why you removed one of the pictures, Trolls and Princess Tuvstarr 1915 - Krenakarore ... Hafspajen (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't remember removing. Humans commit mistakes, you know. Krenakarore ^TK 15:18, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Example of Mr. Halfspajen's edit !

Check your diffs... Well, if it was a mistake, that is better. Hafspajen (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

That's not removing Mr. Halfspajen, this is called WP:NOTIMAGE. Why the need for twelve pictures once there's already a link to Commons there (which is the proper place for pictures) ? You've chosen the pictures on Bauer's article, their size, the type of gallery used... is there anything else I can do for you ? Krenakarore ^TK 18:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Too many pictures

I have no axe to grind here but this article has far too many pictures. Three examples in the gallery would suffice. Additional pictures don't add anything and, per the relevant guideline, interested readers can click on the Commons link if they wish to see further examples of Bauer's work.  Philg88 ^♦talk 20:07, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

A thinking head... agreed. A single row would do better. I also wonder what is happening to other articles such as Bland tomtar och troll, which should already have been moved to Among Gnomes and Trolls. And, Halfspajen, John Bauer "consensus" might come to be quite different from Rembrand's. Krenakarore ^TK 20:34, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Per the title guidelines it should undoubtedly be moved.  Philg88 ^♦talk 21:18, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

12 pictures in the gallery is not too much for an art article. See Rembrand. Hafspajen (talk) 20:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Just because it's done somewhere else doesn't mean that over use of pictures is good adherence to policy.  Philg88 ^♦talk 21:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Galleries are NOT discuraged any more. It is not against the policy. Please read for example discussion at Talk:Charles Marion Russell. Also see WP:VAMOS. Hafspajen (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmm ... WP:VAMOS says: "These galleries should relate clearly to the text and be proportionate to it" and "A Wikipedia article gallery should not just replicate a Commons gallery for the sake of it, but needs to use the images with editorial judgement". This article, much as I don't wish to decry the subject, does not have the repute, nor indeed the length, of the Rembrant article to justify this number of pictures.  Philg88 ^♦talk 21:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Philg88, Krenakarore and Hafspajen A small suggestion. May we maybe keep the number of pictures in this article low, for now. I have expanded the Bland tomtar och troll with the complete list of stories, so maybe more pictures could be used there in connection to the stories in the list and a {{main}} to the Bland tomtar och troll be placed at this article. And vice versa. With two articles so closely related, there is no need to use the same pictures in both articles, the articles could be complementing each other. And in time, when this article is expanded, some more pictures could be added later. I am currently on a little sidetrack from my art articles, but I will give this article my full attention in a not too distant future. I have been studying John Bauer and his work (among some other artists) on and of for over 30 years so I think I can add some things to it. I have also completed the captions on the pictures requested by Hafspajen on my talk page. My very best to all of you, - W.carter (talk) 22:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Under construction.

I understand that there is some nomination at stake here. So all of this is ‘just’ to make a picture more noted?!? Ok, very well. An article is not made better simply by adding more pictures, it is made better by adding more information, more text and making it all look good and more encyclopedic. And it should be properly references... two of the four refs were dead links. Setting the picture in it’s right context. Instead of thrusting the Tuvstarr picture at the readers as soon as they start to read the article, I have given it a proper and very special setting where it belongs. The article IS about the artist John Bauer and not about the Tuvstarr picture. I had not planned to work on this article right now, but since there seems to be some kind of hurry, I will work on it during a couple of days. Make JB more notable and you make his work more notable. I have already expanded and sorted Bland tomtar och troll, please look at the talk page, and it will become a complement to this article. - W.carter (talk) 21:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, this is as far as I got today. I'll do the 'Artistry' section tomorrow. - W.carter (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done...for now. Lots of new text making more pictures justified. I hope, but some could definitely be deleted. The article will have to be copy edited, checked, tweaked and check again, but now we have something proper to work with. I will revisit it numerous times later since there are still things to add, but I hope it will do for now. My best to all of you, - W.carter (talk) 19:31, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I also installed an archive here at the talk page, but I am unsure of how the moving of the text is done. Some help would be appreciated. The sooner we get all of this sorry mess out of sight the better. This kind of conduct may be tolerated at the House of Lords (yes, I've seen some debates on the telly) but certainly not at an Encyclopedia. - W.carter (talk) 10:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

@Philg88: Do you think you could help me with this. I don't know if I should install a Bot for it (or what settings to use for it) or move the conversation manually. Thanks, - W.carter (talk) 15:21, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

@W.carter:  Done

Copy edit

I've rewritten the intro to active voice and grouped similar info together, and Early life and education are updated. I shifted some refs for readability. I think they are still straight. Alrich44 (talk) 13:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello Alrich44! So, about your edits: If you accept an article for CE at the Guild, please place a marker at the Request page to let others know that you are working on it. When doing a CE here you should preferably just correct sentences, look for bad WP mark up, point out missing facts etc. not start to re-write the article or introduce new facts. If you think it's that bad you should send it back to the editor with a note of your objections.

Hi @W.carter:, thank you for the constructive feedback. I've come to appreciate John through this article. Him and I share several things in common, so he does deserve the best article we can do for him. I did not place a marker because I did not want to take an official CE role considering my experience level. At the same time, I wanted to help and provided a CE note to more explain how I came to be editing this article. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• The first part, the lead, is a short summery of things in the text. Nothing should be mentioned there that is not in the text. If you want new material in the leade you must also introduce it in the article.

The most glaring thing to me in the leade is the redundancy of his death. I would hope someone would rewrite that part of it. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• In one of your edits you introduced the history and geography of Jönköping in the lead, and even such a small comment as "an old southern-Swedish trading center" must be referenced if mentioned in an article that is due for GA review. This is not a self evident fact. And if included, it should be in the article not in the lead. The link to Jönköping is quite sufficient. That's what links are for. Readers click on them if they want more facts.

Point taken. I thought adding more about the setting of his life would add to it, maybe more should be added into the article so that it fits in the lead. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• The length of the lead should also be in proportion to the article. You moved so many things from the main area to the lead so that the article became top-heavy.
• You wrote "oil painting" where it was written "oil sketch". If you are not an artist, you may be unfamiliar with the fact that some artists do sketches in oil before they make an oil painting. The picture is of the oil sketch and not of the resulting oil painting. The article also mention that Bauer sketched in oil, this should have been a clue. This can serve as an example as to why copy editor should not correct facts in the text, just write "What??"

I am an artist. I have not sketched in oil, but I can see why you would want to keep an emphasis that this was only a sketch.

• You started to describe a charcuterie when the link to that article takes care of that. (See above)

I'm thinking this is a matter of style. I know when I was reading the article, it slowed me down to go find out what it was. I'm fine with relying on the link. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• Switching which should be first, Swedish or English name of "Among Gnomes and Trolls" was good. Nice catch! That was good CE. I will fix that. It's things like that you should be looking for in a CE here. :)

Thanks. There are two other places I did this. I was kind of in the middle of which one should be first. Even though this is an English article, it is about a Swedish artist.

• This is a biography about Bauer and not an article about his art, therefore the pictures of the art may be numerous but should not be dominating, like the one you enlarged to 300px just below the infobox. A good article should actually also look nice, be pleasant to look at and not contain things that are distracting.

I can see why you would think it was distracting. I'm relying on your judgement on its size. I would think that putting the best picture he has in here up toward the introduction would be good, but it doesn't matter that much to me. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• The pictures in the different sections are chosen very carefully to illustrate the section and the diversity of Bauer. The aquarelle in that section was chosen since it represents another part of Bauer's artistry, not the usual "Gnomes and Trolls", they have their own article. The Lappland pic is in every book, and in the article, described as mediocre work, and should not be used as an example up in the main text.

Another example of style. I considered the Lapland painting a better one, but again I don't feel strongly about it.

• Spotting the double mention of Lappland in one of the sentences was also good. Pure CE. But the resulting edit should have been more precise. I will fix that.
• The thing you added last to the lead, "—the lake of his childhood" was really unnecessary. We are not sentimental here at the Wikipedia. People die, period.

I thought it fit well, drew the reader in, and was transitional to his early childhood. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

A lot of critique, sorry, but I hope this does not discourage you too much. There is just so much to learn here at the Wikipedia. I still consider myself a newbie in most things, but I have also picked up a lot thanks to good coaching by senior editors. Hope you have someone to bug with questions about WP. That really helps. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 20:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the coaching. Alrich44 (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

@Alrich44:Ok. One more "coach thing": When answering a bulleted list like this one, preferably answer with a similar bulleted list to match mine in one single place. I getting cross eyed trying to sort out what comments are yours and which are mine. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 21:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I just want to interject that this kind of interaction is what Wikipedia is all about - two committed editors working together for the good of the project. Well done both of you!  Philg88 ^♦talk 21:50, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Because @W.carter: believes another CE will soon join this effort, I'm going to stop editing it for now. Good luck on the GA. Alrich44 (talk) 17:28, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment about his death

As so rightly mentioned in the previous section the bit about his death and the ship is a bit lengthy for a biography. But there is a reason: In the Swedish Wikipedia the accident has an entire article of its own. See this if you can read Swedish. That article is not yet translated to English. The ship wreck was one of the most noted accidents in Sweden at the time, because of the number of deaths and Bauer being killed. When/if the article is translated and present here at the English Wikipedia, much of this section will be transferred to that article. This is sort of the "reverse info-situation" to Jönköping (see above section). w.carter-Talk 22:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Schools

I've swapped the two other Swedish/English titles because of the agreement on the style for this article. They are not 100% clear to me yet, so I'll let you (W.carter) sort them out. Per [1], the institution's names should follow title capitalization rules, but I could not locate online how much of the name is officially in the title. I believe the English and Swedish capital letters should match each other too.

• Jönköping Public School of Higher Education (Jönköpings Högre Allmäna Läroverk) --online I believe this in English is the Jönköping University.
• The Jönköping Technical School (Jönköpings Tekniska Skola)

Alrich44 (talk) 23:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

A third... Agneta och sjökungen ("Agneta and the Sea King"). That was sad. Alrich44 (talk) 23:29, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

None of the schools exist today, so no exact translations to English are to be found. A "Läroverk" is definitely not the same as a university. :) Remember, this was almost a century ago. The school system in Sweden has been revised and altered many times since then. Swedish and English use capitals in very different ways, not always the same way. And please refrain from personal remarks when you find flaws in the text. (Remember: Keep it civil). w.carter-Talk 13:25, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi W.Carter, The "sad" part was about his story, nothing about very minor swapping of titles. As I said before, I can see the titles going either way because it is a Swedish story. I've entrusted the article to you because of your great investment and caring about it. I do appreciate learning about Swedish capitalization and the historical naming of schools.

Is the university on the same site as the one in the story? Other people may be interested too. I've found when people will even travel to an area to follow someone's footsteps they've come to admire, just as I've come to appreciate the effort you are making for John. His own family and generations to come will probably appreciate your work too and may revisit the places of their fathers' father. Alrich44 (talk) 05:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it is a sad story. (Sorry about the misunderstanding.) And the time it was considered a national tragedy, hence the media coverage and the macabre tour. Sweden was in mourning. Bauer is to Sweden what Beatrix Potter is to Britain. I do not know if the schools are at the same place. You have to ask someone who knows the history of Jönköping. And if someone goes to Jönköping they will have no trouble locating the heritage of Bauer, the whole town is invested in their great son! But such things do not belong in this article. You just Google it. I know about these "pilgrimages". When I wrote Einar Jolin I was astonished by the number of hits on Google I got at one of his old addresses, Fiskargatan 9 Stockholm, but it had nothing to do with Jolin, it was all connected to Lisbeth Salander. :) Anyway, in the old system a "läroverk" was something you went to and graduated from before going to university. Bwt, this is not "my work", it's just a compilation I've made from many books written by real writers and researchers about Bauer. This is the way the Wikipedia works. We do not "write", we convey. We are editors, not authors. Best, w.carter-Talk 11:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Leade

Not so good: Painting the Swedish nature, forests, mythical creatures and magical places, he is best known for his illustrations of the children's fairy tales. Reasond: First, I don't believe an native US English person would say, "Painting the Swedish nature, forest,...." Second, When a sentence starts with action, then the rest of the sentence would normally be a result of that action. Instead, the above sentence goes on to list another thing that John painted. I would list the kinfs of things John painted, and then say what he did best.

I'm not clear why the death is written about twice in the leade, unless you are trying to exactly summarize the main article. When it is condensed this much though, I don't believe it is warranted. To me, just a matter of style, I would have two or three following paragraphs. One talking about his art, and one talking about his family. Since he and his family passed on together and the subject of the paragraph is people, I would group the family and their death in one. If this is done, then their death would be the natural end of the leade.

The extent of writing about the ship wreck makes sense to me, and I can see why it could become another article.

Leade example:

John Albert Bauer (4 June 1882 – 20 November 1918) was a Swedish painter and illustrator. His paintings include portraits, natural Swedish landscapes, mythical creatures, and magical places. He is best known for his illustrations in the early releases of Among Gnomes and Trolls (Bland tomtar och troll), an anthology about Swedish folklore and children's fairy tales.

Bauer was born and raised in Jönköping, the son of a respected food manufacturer. At 16, he moved to Stockholm to study at the Royal Swedish Academy of Arts. During his years at the academy, he received his first commissions to illustrate stories in books and magazines. He met artist Ester Ellqvist at the academy, and they married in 1906.

Early on, Bauer traveled to Lappland, Germany, and Italy. Influences from the cultures he encountered became vital to his works. He painted and illustrated in a romantic nationalism style with influences from the Italian renaissance and the Sami culture. Most of his works are prints and watercolors in monochrome or muted colors due to the printing techniques at the time. His artist expressions also included major oil paintings and frescos.

Bauer was still developing as an artist exploring these techniques when at the age of 36, he, Ester and their son, Bengt, drowned in a ship wreck on Lake Vättern. Alrich44 (talk) 00:08, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

"...the Swedish nature..." and "natural Swedish landscapes" are not the same thing. See: Nature. But the flow in this text is good. I will use most of it. w.carter-Talk 14:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done w.carter-Talk 15:15, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Swedish nature

Hi W.carter, If/when you have the time, I'm curious what Swedish nature is in Swedish art. I know what nature is. In America, I'm used to a couple major painting subjects being portraits and landscapes. Then I suppose there are city/urban settings. Landscape doesn't translate well into saying a person painted a picture of a tree, but it's America's way of saying the person likes to paint nature.

I see the article is coming along nicely. Alrich44 (talk) 05:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Alrich44. Not an easy task you have given me. :) It's like being asked to describe Zen in three short sentences and maybe a bit outside my area of expertise, but I'll give it a try. The Swedish concept of nature is one of the most difficult things for a non-Swede to understand. It involves many spiritual and ethereal aspects, without being religious. Most Swedes do not consider themselves very religious, but they do tend to have an almost religious approach to the Swedish nature. It is like nature has a spirit or soul of its own, bordering on the concept of Gaia (mythology) or even Kami, and that has to be captured in paintings of Swedish nature, as opposed to painings of natural Swedish landscapes. When you look at the painting you have to experience how it feels to be in a place like the one depicted, the feeling of sunlight on your skin, the cold smells that emerges at dusk, how the wind makes you shiver, the way the color of the light tells you what time it must be, how awed you feel when looking up at the stars, how comforting the soft moss can be on a cold stone, etc. Not easy things to capture in a painting, and certainly not easy to understand if you have not experienced it, or grown up with it.

Let's try an example. The first picture below is a photo of a Swedish tarn. This is what they look like. Pretty, but that's all. The second picture is a study of a pond (not exactly a tarn, but it will have to do for now, the selection at Commons is limited) by another famous artist, Anders Zorn. It is a very good painting of a natural Swedish landscape, but without a "soul". And last Bauer's tarn. The essential elements for nature are exaggerated: this is how dark a tarn seems when you stand by it, how looming and obscure the woods behind you feels but you are sheltered from harm by the great mossy boulders, it contains only two birds symbolizing the quiet presence of animals watching you, the hinted ripples on the pond suggesting that something might be lurking in its depths, etc.

• 
  Tarn, photo.
• 
  Study of a pond, Anders Zorn.
• 
  Tuvstarr by the tarn, John Bauer.

Evening in June, Anders Zorn.

There are of course other ways of depicting the Swedish nature, to say "this is in Sweden" in a painting that only someone who has grown up there recognize. This can be seen in another painting by Zorn (to the right). We only have to look at it to know that it's a painting of an evening in June. There are some clues. The light is dimming to a bluer hue. Outsiders might think that the painting is just too dark. One look at the flowers tells us that it's in early summer. We may not know the names of the flowers but we recognize the mixture and how developed the different species are. The plants and the trees are slightly blurred, telling us that the evening breeze (always present at large bodies of water in Sweden) is still around.

Hope I have been able to convey something of the concept. Nature is also a very personal thing, so others might choose to describe it differently. If one were to describe it more thorough, it could easily fill volumes and I am by no means a scholar on the subject. It is also trick to translate the very word nature. We do not use the general word "nature" but say "The Nature" to distinguish it from other kinds of "nature". But writing it like that would seem ridiculous in an English text, so we have to settle for the next best thing: nature. I am certainly not the first writer facing this problem, preferably we just avoid talking about the whole thing to avoid all misconceptions. But since this article is about a superstar in the "The Nature-depicting-department", it is unavoidable. I would probably get a lot of critique from my fellow countrymen if I did not at least try to include it. Best, w.carter-Talk 10:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hellooo W.carter, well I'm surprised and very pleased that I asked and you took the time to explain this so fully. I do believe I understand and connect to all you've shared. Having grown up in Montana as part of a Swedish family, it helps explain some of my origins at a deeper level. We gravitated more toward experiencing nature than toward a formal church. I've spent much time in the outdoors/outback, so all your descriptions are very real to me. I also have some Native American in me and in my family. They connect in a similar way with other spiritual beliefs. I enjoy the little I know of Zen, in some ways similar to connecting with nature. I'm extremely pleased we have met and you have shared this with me. To me, I would create a section to explain this to the rest of the world; it is like Bruce Lee when he decided to go against his elders and share one of the beauties of their culture.

The martial arts goes much deeper in Asian cultures too. To begin with, they go beyond beyond the martial-military aspect. These arts are a form of motion, Tai Chi is a classic example. A lot of Westerners and Europeans do not understand its depth, and its health. There are many reasons a lot of the population practice it their entire lives, similar to yoga, there are levels few people reach. A kind of digression, but perhaps a help in understanding.

I can see an entire article on this if it does not exist. One could be started here, then split off. Thank you for taking the time. Maybe you could enlist other Swedish authors to help, even if they are not yet editors here. Sometimes I've emailed experts for help, share your dream, and who knows where the path will take us.

Alrich44 (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Alrich44, glad you could benefit from the explanation. It's certainly the first time I've ever come close to being compared to Bruce Lee. Please remember though that these article talk pages exists only to talk about things concerning the article or the Wikipedia. It is not a social forum (even if all of us have made similar mistakes here as newbies, :) and some of us still have a hard time staying on subject). User talk pages, on the other hand, are a bit more lenient about subjects to discuss. I only wrote the explanation since it was related to Bauer. And, sorry, no. This will not be an article since what I have written is not referenced. On this talk page I am an "author", but none of the text can be used in an article on the Wikipedia since I am not a "reliable source". :) If someone could find similar texts in books or independent websites, then it could be used, and someone may write that article. For now it is just a lengthy sidebar to the discussion of the article. Best, w.carter-Talk 15:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Bauer (illustrator)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 02:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Material is cited, generally with foreign language sources. Good faith assumption that sources cover the cited content. Citations to reliable sources, where required.
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Updated PD tags for several images from {{PD-Art}}, which creates an error message, to the correct {{PD-Sweden-photo}}
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Captions of works by Bauer were updated
	7. Overall assessment.	The expansion and improvement of the article has been a good collaborative effort, let by W.carter and with input, direction and copyediting by Krenakarore, Onel5969, Alrich44, Siawase, Philg88, EditorInTheRye, Demiurge1000 and Mr Stephen. Great job!

Questions related to review

Discussion

I have a couple of questions to run by you as I'm working on the article: Do you mind if I go ahead and made minor edits to the article, like this change? I edited the following: "He founded a successful charcuterie business at the Östra Torget in Jönköping,[2] where the family lived in the apartment above the shop until building a house in Sjövik in 1881, one year before John Bauer was born.[3] John lived at the Villa Sjövik by the shore of Lake Rocksjön with his two brothers, one older and one younger; his only sister died at a young age.[2]". My hope is that it is clearer and accurate. The citation style is a bit different than what I've seen: 1) there seems to be a mixture of short and long citations, and there is a bibliography. For instance, should "Romdahl, Axel L. "John Bauer". In Axelsson, Roger. Svenskt biografiskt lexikon (in Swedish) 2 (1920 ed.). Stockholm: National Archives of Sweden. p. 783. Retrieved 12 May 2014." be added to the bibliography (without the page number) with a short citation with the author and page number? Related to #1, I am going to sort the bibliography and further reading sections alphabetically by last name - and split notes into their own section. Done I finished making some edits to the "Early life and education" section. The edits were either to be a bit more concise or to have more of an encyclopedic tone. The article is generally well-written, it just needs a bit of polishing. I will stop for the time being to let you absorb the changes and the questions about long/short citations and await your response. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Hello CaroleHenson, thank you for staring this review so soon after the GAN. :) I don't mind at all. English is not my native language so there are many aspects and nuances that I'm still unfamiliar with. Tweak the language as much as you like as long as the facts remain correct. Looks good. This has always been a tricky part. Lots of facts to fit into one sentence. Again, I'm grateful for all corrections of my language for the sake of the article. :) As to citation style; I did not know that I had a citation style at all! I'm still something of a newbie here and not too familiar with all WP style-things yet. I have tried to give as much information about each source as possible, using as many parameters as needed to do so. It is pretty straight forward when the source is a modern book, but some sources are old books or journals, lacking many of the normal parameters. I used the harv refs whenever I could since they are easy to deal with, and normal citations for everything else. Since Sweden is a highly digitized country, there are also a number of sources that are both books and websites (just like with Google books), and I just did not know whether to put these in cite web or cite book. I accessed them online. The one you mentioned is even worse. It's an online encyclopedia/database that used to be in just ordinary volumes, but these have been digitized and the original books are almost impossible to find anywhere. Each entry have different authors, and since it is a work in progress (has been since 1917) many entries have different dates. There is an explanation in English about it here. I don't think it can be put in the bibliography section since it is only accessible online, but it is one of the most accurate and best sources for biographies in Sweden today. I'm open to suggestions about how the style of the citations can be improved. :) Thanks! I had not thought about this. I just added the books to the biography section as I used them in the text. This looks much neater. As for the note, I forgot about it since it was only one note and I did not think it warranted a whole section of it's own. Ok. The review has started pretty much as I thought it would. The facts are solid (I would not dare to use anything else!), my language is a bit crappy, I'm not used to writing in an encyclopedic manner and I'm still learning about the WP style. Again, thanks! Looking forward to the next bunch of questions. Best, w.carter-Talk 10:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC) I will read the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Visual arts and correct the captions for the pictures. It will take a day or two since I am very busy (at work) this week. I really did not expect the review to start so soon. :) w.carter-Talk 11:13, 31 August 2014 (UTC) 1 and 2. - Ok, I'll move forward editing the rest of the sections. 3. Citations / notes Re: use of long citations within references for web pages - when I use short citations, instead of Bibliograpy I use Sources and put the web pages there, too. But that's definitely a personal preference. Regarding my question, though, I misunderstood that it was not a book - sorry about that - I'm good with your response. Regarding the notes, I see your point about it only being one note, but if more are needed then the section is good to go. It's not wrong to combine citations and notes, but it's easier to distinguish what are notes and what are true citations with this method (i.e., use of a separate notes section is a personal preference) See Help:Shortened footnotes#Explanatory notes. If you prefer to keep the note with the citations, that's fine. 4. - thanks Given that English is not your native language, you've done a great job on the article - I'll just review and edit for tweaks.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC) You are very kind, but the article would not be in such good shape if it were not for the pruning and excellent copy editing done by Onel5969. Some comments: I saw your comment on the pictures, that they should be on the right side and the same size. It's fine by me. In my "defense" I can only say that when I was tweaking the style I was looking at other GA and FA articles such as Rembrandt and El Greco where pics are placed left and right and in different sizes. So I assumed that this was the way to do it. Lets keep the "Notes". You are perfectly right in that it makes things easier for the next editor. After all, I did not create this article, I am simply expanding it and passing it on to future editors. About the refs and biography section. At the time of writing I was a bit confused about it all and asked at the Teahouse. The answer was: Put it all in references. But I have seen articles where short refs are in the Citations section and the rest in References/Sources and they look kind of tidy. I did want the Biography section separate from the References though. This list of major books borders on the Furter reading and having them separate makes it easier for the readers to find them. I did think about having even more sections (Notes, Citations, References and Bibliography) but then I saw the messy Notes section at Rembrandt and used a middle way instead. I can always tidy it up (now or later) if you think there is need for it. A question has been raised re the pictures (see below) and I would like your input on this. For now I will just fix the captions of the existing pics. There is one place where your edit of the text has distorted the fact, but it is probably just because my text was fuzzy to begin with. In the Lappland section a sentence is now written: "To record this change, Carl Adam Victor Lundholm decided to publish..." This is incorrect, the book was not made to record the change. In plain language: Lappland and the north of Sweden became a popular fad in the rest of Sweden when the money from all the new industries in the north stared to flow. Everything "Lappland" was in fashion and the book was simply a way to capitalize on this. It was what today would be called a "coffee table book". It included nothing about the change, just lots of romanticized stuff about Lappland. If you can think of a way rephrasing that sentence, it would be great. A bit later in the same section it now may sound as if Bauer was reluctant to the entire job, which he was not, he was just miffed at being asked to "audition", he thought he had already proven he could do it. (Or maybe this is exactly what the text says now, just me misunderstanding it!) For now, w.carter-Talk 19:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Image justification - I have been using going by: "Image layout: the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images#Location states: 'Do not place images on the left at the start of any section or subsection. Images on the left must be placed somewhere after the first paragraph.'" that I found in a FA review. But the current version of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images#Location states: "In most cases, images should be right justified on pages, which is the default placement." I am so with you in using good articles as examples for article approaches. There are obviously varying opinions about the approach for justifying images, but I still find that it is good to right justify images in general - but particularly the first image in the section. (e.g., Ethel Sands) Notes - sounds good. References / Bibliography sections - no need to change, we're good. Images - your approach makes sense. I'll look forward to any further input in that section. Lappland - I like the phrase "to capitalize on this change" for the book... I get your point about the reluctance and will try to come up with a change. I like the point about having to "audition". I'll go back and review the original verbiage + your and my comments and make an edit for you to look at. Great input!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:01, 31 August 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:Thanks, you are too kind. Yes "to capitalize on this change" sounds good. Let's tell it like it really was. I leave the article in your very capable hands for the night. Namaste, w.carter-Talk 20:24, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Image selection

Discussion

Related to the GA review I guess, I question if it really is an improvement to this article to exclude much of his most recognized works. From reading the earlier discussions, I think the rationale was that these images are included in the Among Gnomes and Trolls article instead, but shouldn't the quality of each article be determined separately? I think it would be an improvement to this article to include his most iconic works in the gallery here (maybe in conjuncture with the prose too) instead of using that space for relatively unknown, niche works. See for example here[2] some of his most iconic works that were used on Swedish stamps, only one of which is included in this article. Siawase (talk) 17:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Hello Siawase. When I saw your post, my first reaction was "Oh, no! Not this again!" which is very unfair to you since you do not know the whole story. The reason for my cautious selection of pictures is that just prior to my expansion of the article, it was involved in a very nasty edit war regarding what pictures, how large and how many there should be in this article. The war raged on this talk page (see archives) and on several user talk pages among other users. I came in to this as a neutral bystander and my expansion of the article, moderation with pictures in the article and the transferal of several pictures to Among Gnomes and Trolls was a kind of "peace treaty" that everyone could agree on. I can certainly see your point and I can also make some suggestions for substitutions and alterations, but I dare hardly voice them for fear of igniting the whole thing again. Let's first hear what the reviewer CaroleHenson has to say about this. Who would have thought that an art biography could be just as "dangerous" to edit as a Middle East article? Best, w.carter-Talk 18:26, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Oops, sorry, I looked at some of the debate in the archive, but I didn't realize it got that bad. Mostly, I just saw the vastly improved article (great work by the way!) and I was surprised to see so few of his images I'm familiar with (knowing him from Swedish mainstream coverage.) I hope we can find a solution without stirring up old conflicts. Siawase (talk) 18:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC) I can absolutely see Siawase's point, but I agree with W.carter that the "For illustrations from the famous children's anthology, see Among Gnomes and Trolls" in the Works section was a very appropriate solution. If the two of you agree to add one image from that body of work to the article section or in the works section, that's fine with me. If this stirs up a previously resolved hornet's nest, though, it starts to cause the "stability" of the article (item #5 of the GA criteria) to come into question.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Follow-up thought: But, if there is descent, it is better to know about it now and resolve it than to finish the Good article process, potentially getting the GA, and then having issues flare up after that.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the input both of you! There are so many pictures to choose from, and I will post a suggestion for alterations here as soon as possible, and if all agree on the change, then I'll do it. I'll just move carefully to not rock the boat. (Let me get a cup of tea first.^^) Most of the quarrel was about the Tuvstarr being nominated for featured picture, but at that time this article was not more than a start/stub and a better article was needed to support the pic. One editor just simply drowned the article in pictures "to make it more notable" and others opposed him. I thought it was better to expand the text. My first part of the expansion helped Tuvstarr gain featured status. If the article becomes a GA I very much doubt the conflict will flare up again as it will support the featured picture very well. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 19:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Ah, that is a very helpful summary of the background and your summary and approach sounds good.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC) Thank you for explaining what happened W.carter. Sounds good to me too. Siawase (talk) 19:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:@Siawase:So, here is my suggestion: I move the aquarelle of Ester to the gallery and in its place in the text I put this picture of his very iconic trolls. This pic is not used in the Among Gnomes and Trolls so there will be no repetition or taking a pic from that article. And the article will have one more pic that is "very Bauer". And it is from Among G... Ok? w.carter-Talk 19:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Sounds great to me. That's one of his more recognizable work, and an image with trolls seems ideal. Siawase (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Agreed.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:@Siawase:Ok, I'll make the switch and fix up the pic captions tomorrow so that CaroleHenson can do her editing without risking editing conflicts with me. Also it's getting late here and want to be more awake when I do serious editing. (I'll just make one more comment further up the page in a moment.) It's a pleasure working with you two! Best, w.carter-Talk 20:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Article questions

Discussion

Here's my working list of some questions that have come up during editing: What does "When he proposed to Ellqvist, Bauer did so without the approval of his parents" mean? Was Ellqvist unsuitable for some reason? Did their reluctance affect the couple's relationship - or Bauer's reliance on his parents for financial support? What does "experimented with new ways of painting" mean? I assume that Domenico Ghirlandaio is the Ghirlandaio (because of their close relationship to Botticelli + he was the most likely to be referred to only by surname) that may have been the inspiration for Svanhamnen OR "Swan maiden", but haven't been able to verify that. Is it Domenico, or another Ghirlandaio? Regarding the death of the Bauer family - the section says "Investigations indicated" - were there multiple investigations (i.e., multiple organizations / multiple investigatory efforts)? --CaroleHenson (talk) 23:33, 31 August 2014 (UTC @CaroleHenson:I'll just answer these questions first and then move on down the page. His parents objected for the most common reason parents object to something: They thought he should get a proper , steady job before getting married so that he would be able to support his wife and family. They had no objection to Ellqvist at all and they would always support Bauer financially, they just wanted him to grow up and be responsible. All of this did not affect the couple's relationship at all. They were two spoiled kids with rich parents, something they knew and commented on in their letters to each other. I'll have to think about how to phrase this in the text, unless you have some suggestion. I have altered the "experimented with new ways of painting" in the text. Just hope the right word really is "modernistic" (cubism, impressionism, expressionism).:) This part of his artistry is usually just glanced over in most biographies since those paintings were few, with no major works and of no interest to the average JB fan. You have to be a really hard core aficionado to know about them. You can see some of the works here: expressionism or King Death and the War. There are lots of other little tidbits like this about Bauer. I thought I could save them for the FA!:) Just need to pass this hurdle first. Yes, Domenico Ghirlandaio is correct. Ooops! Yes, there were a number of different hearings, investigations, speculations, accusations, etc. over many year. Remember, this was a century ago in a rural part of the world where things moved slowly and not at all in the manner we are used to. There was no "CSI/FBI"-like team to control the "scene of the crime" and make one conclusive investigation. As far as investigations goes, this was the Wild West. Moving on down the page. w.carter-Talk 15:25, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Perhaps, "When he proposed to Ellqvist, Bauer did so without the approval of his parents, who thought that he should be more established in a career and self-supporting before marriage." Rather than modernistic, the right term is Modernism or Modernist. I think saying that he was experimenting with modernism, with perhaps an example of one or two works is sufficient. 3 and 4 - great, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: 1, excellent, 2, also good, is also shortens the sentence. I know the movement is Modernism, it was just in that sentence that I thought along the lines of "impressionistic" or "cubistic". Should the work just be mentioned (I suggest we use the Fanstyg. Gouache. from the museum website) or should I go and nick a pic? w.carter-Talk 16:51, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: I, personally, would stick with "experimenting with modernism", but I'll leave that to you. I guess I just have a hard time figuring out how to use the work modernistic in this case. Whatever you think about adding / not adding an image is good with me.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments / next steps

Discussion

I regrouped sections to more standard career, exhibitions, collections, works, legacy, and popular culture sections. If this looks good to you, then I am comfortable closing out the issue in the GA review checklist regarding sections. Within the Career section I broke out the first block of info into three subsections, but you may not agree with the grouping of info - mind taking a look? There was only one award, so I rolled it into the "exhibitions" section. Another option is to add it within the appropriate subsection of his "Career" section Please look at the move I made of the quotes about subjects from the section about Bauer as a person to Career / subjects section. It seems like it goes better here, but if you like it in the section about Bauer, the person perhaps you could add something that makes a transition from the exiting info about his personal persona / self-doubts to this info. I put correspondence info in a note, it's not really a "Legacy" type of issue I have finished the editing of the "Biography" subsections and overall the writing is good. For the most part, I just needed to work on the following: Manual of Style: Expressions Manual of Style: Information style and tone Concise language / brevity You seem very articulate for someone with English as a second language. Do you feel comfortable editing the remaining sections based upon these points? Thanks, I've really liked reading this article!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:57, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:First of all: Thank you for creating Ester Ellqvist!! That was marvelous! :) I did not know if she met the notability criteria for the English WP. Hope you don't mind if I tweak, add and fix things with it later. And so: I have no trouble at all with the regrouping. The headings are just labels, the text is still the same. You are so much more experienced with the WP style than I am. I trust your judgment. Fine by me. Multiple short sections makes it easier to read and find facts in the text. I think the award in better like this. It's not that notable, I just stumbled upon it by chance so let's not make a big deal of it. That part works in both sections, I just had not thought about it that way. And I think readers are looking for things about his art more that his personality. I moved the self-portrait though. With the "person" section so small, it was getting a bit crowded in that part of the main text, with one large pic just above pushing the portrait into the next section and the quotation and all. Since the pic was painted in Italy it could belong in that section as well. Hope you agree. Correspondence is fine as a note. I was just confused since the Swedish word for "legacy" means more like "all things left behind". The English word is more non-material. Mea culpa. "Biography". Check. — ** Ok. Will study these as well. Gulp...well "comfortable" is hardly the word I would use, more like "freaked out", but I can certainly give it a try. No promises that I will succeed though. The pic switch prev discussed is done and captions are fixed + the citation needed are gone. I also changed the gallery setting to "perrow 5" since this will allow all the pics in one row on most modern widescreen format computers. Thanks for all your had work! Best, w.carter-Talk 16:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC) Article about Ester, yes W.carter, I struggled with notability, but included her because 1) her role as a model for Bauer's work, 2) she was a painter born in the 19th century, when it was unusual for women to become painters, and 3) I found information about her, albeit most of it was in Swedish which cramps how much I can do. There is a very good bachelor's thesis about her, written in Swedish, which cannot be used directly as a reliable source, but has a wealth of cited information to draw on for research. I enjoy writing about women born in the 19th century before who were artists - and created a template for Historic Swedish women artists (not sure this is the best title for the top of the template, but I went with it, any suggestions are appreciated!) I was very impressed by the number of women artists born in the 1600 and 1700s who were artists and had self-supporting careers!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:(edit conflict)Yes, she certainly deserves an article of her own. I don't know if you saw that the original text about Bauer included much more info about her since I felt that she had to be present as well. This was pruned in c/e to keep the focus on JB, so your bold move was really welcome. I'm sure I can find some more good material about her. Women artist have always been around, it's just that "history" chose to forget them. Title of the template looks good. What other way is there to say it? Some Swedish feminists (there are two opposing fractions) may have some issues with keeping them separate from the men, but WP is American so... Best, w.carter-Talk 17:14, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter:Sections comments - cool, I'll close out the issue in the checklist about sections. Legacy - the word, as used in the Wikipedia article Legacy sections, means specific, notable outcomes of his or her career. Biography / following sections - oh, sorry - I wasn't clear. I'm through with the biography section and was looking for edits to the Career and following sections. I am happy to divide and conquer - but it would be good if took a stab at some of this. I am happy to work on the "Legacy", "Collections" and "Popular culture" sections - and maybe we can split some of the Career section. Pictures - looks good Exhibitions - do you have a citation for the list of exhibitions? We're getting there, the article is a really coming along and I love the subject!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:05, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:Ok, let's see if we can clear this up. :) I understand that you are done with the biography section, I just meant that I have to study your edits and all the WP style-things better if I am to do any further editing. In your previous statement here a small but important word got lost: "- but it would be good if ??? took a stab at some of this." I assume the missing word is "you". :) And if you just tell me what sections I should do, I'll certainly go for it. I did the citation for the exhibitions hours ago?? Are they not correct? w.carter-Talk 17:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Ah, yes, thanks. The review of the biography section makes sense - both from the perspective of seeing the type of changes I made - and to ensure that I've not changed the intended meaning of the content. Yep, I missed the word "you" - thanks for clarifying that If you could start with the career section, that would be good - and I'll work on the sections that I mentioned (legacy, popular culture, collections) in the meantime, if that works for you. My thinking is that you're very familiar with his career - and I'm familiar with the type of content for the legacy, popular culture and collections sections. Does that work for you? I'll hold off on any edits right now and if you could let me know when it's good for me to begin those edits then I'll start at that time. Sorry, I just remembered when I added comments about the citation missing tag I added - and added the comment without checking, sorry about that. Great clarifications!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2014 (UTC) You can go right ahead and do your edits. I have a bit of reading to do before I start :), and besides... my head is spinning right now, this is all kind of new to me and I'm learning as I am trying to keep up with you! The article is yours for the evening, so no editing conflicts. If I feel like doing any work here just to relax, I have other articles to work on. See ya, w.carter-Talk 18:23, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Maybe it's good to slow down for a bit. Head spinning and gulps are not fun. And, adding more edits for review just add to your workload. I can hold off for a bit - there's been a lot done in a short period of time. Thanks so much for your input and great intention! I'll keep an eye out for the watchlist for changes and when it's a good time to chime back in again.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions

Discussion

@W.carter: I'm not meaning to press at all - please consider the following at your leisure. I felt bad about the process becoming overwhelming (and having been on the other side as a native English writer, I understand part of what you are feeling). I created Talk:John Bauer (illustrator)/work page with some suggestions / thoughts in bold and strike out to consider for a couple of the Career subjections. Again, look at this when you're ready to come back in and let me know if this is helpful. They are just suggestions for your consideration.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: No need to apologize! :) It's not the first time this has happened to med here at the WP. Editors tend to get exited when they have a newbie eager to learn and soon forget that I have to absorb first in order to be able to learn anything new. :) So I have developed the "bad habit" of kindly saying "enough for now". Don't be offended by it. I have been reading this entire evening and I think I'm beginning to get some grip on it. I glanced at you new page (thank you) and I had already come to some of the same conclusions. Don't think that I'm ungrateful, but can I please try this for myself first? It's the best way of seeing if I've got it right? Like taking a test and later check the result to see how I did? Just to learn better. Good night for now, w.carter-Talk 22:15, 1 September 2014 (UTC) Absolutely (and I had to make some tweaks, I messed up the bolding). Sure, sounds like a plan. I absolutely wasn't trying to press... take your time and approach it as you like. Night.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:So, I've made my "stab" at the article, let's just hope I did not wound it too much. Haven't had time to go over the sections a second time to look for typos and blatant mistakes, but it will be interesting to hear what the preliminary verdict is. One of the reasons I want to learn as much as possible right now is that I have another article in the GAN queue, and it would be nice to be able to tweak it as much as possible before the review starts. And it's never wrong to know how to write other nice articles. :) Your tips and links to more exact parts of the MOS has been extremely helpful! They have made me look at the article from a very new angle, just hope it helped. I made two new notes. These are covered by the "next" inline citation in the main text. Is that enough or should the same refs be used in the notes like in note 2? All the best, w.carter-Talk 23:23, 2 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Sounds great! I'm in the midst of something at the moment and I know it's getting late for you - so I'll take a look at them later and any comments will be ready for you tomorrow.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:45, 2 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Great work on the changes between these versions. You've done a really good job - particularly as your edits progressed. Your tag at another conversation "the cleaner" is appropriate - I would be impressed if you were a native speaker. Intro - I really like where you're headed with the additional sentence. What do you think about the tweaks to: "His illustrations and paintings broadened the understanding and appreciation of Swedish folklore, fairy tales and landscape." (which implies in general / globally) Modernism - in the context of the sentence it makes tons of sense to put the examples in a note, but what do you think about wording it as a sentence rather than captions? Subjects - Your changes to the first paragraph looks good. Regarding the second paragraph, I understand where you're going, but I thought of it as an expression through his friend's eyes and so I thought it didn't need to be as formal. I thought the way it was originally worded was good. I'm a little confused by the changes. Inspiration - The changes look good. Two minor tweaks: "carriers" should be "careers" - and "became" in regards to the pleats should be stated as a completed action rather than something in progress (i.e., tense). Perhaps the word "were" could be used instead of "became". Style - the words "resemble" and "motif" were good changes. Regarding "one where the motif is depicted as in the summer and one where the same motif is covered with snow." what do you think about something like... "one where the motif is depicted in a summer and winter scene" or "one where the motif is depicted several ways, like a landscape represented in different seasons" Style item #2 - I like the changes that you've made regarding the printing process. To take it a step further there are a couple of grammatical errors: "printing with all colors", "his works became more in demand", "the pictures gained more color." Perhaps phrases like "full-color printing" and "his works were in greater demand" and "the pictures were produced with more color" would be better. In the last two cases the issue is tense (in progress vs. done) and a matter of control - It's Bauer who has the pictures produced with more color - it's not something left up to fate. (I'm very tired, I hope that makes sense) Watercolor - looks good Among Gnomes and Trolls... - You've done an especially good job on this section. Minor tweaks "Bauers pictures" should be "Bauer's pictures", showing possession. "Painings" typo. The sentence: "An improvement for Bauer, as the prints more closely resembled his original paintings" is not a complete thought. Tuvstarr - looks great! Oil paintings - looks great! Large works - looks great! I'm very impressed - really great editing!! I think I'm finally getting the distinction about timing of the introduction of modernism... I've written about it from the perspective of its early days in Paris in the 1870s and 1880s - but I'm getting the point that was among a small group of people and didn't spread til later. Perhaps a ramble and a good time to sign-off.--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC) Hi Carole, I just glad I didn't mess it up totally. :-/ Re "cleaner" I refer to my user page. The lax attitude at the SweWiki has unfortunately tagged along to this eminent WP with a bunch of articles related to Sweden. My improved edits must be credited to your good tutoring. Thank you, much appreciated! Comments on your suggestions: Re Intro - I saw your note in the review and just tagged my sentence to the article as a reminder. (It was in the middle of the night and I had become a bit obsessive with the article...) Your suggestion is much more eloquent. Taken. Modernism - will do. Subjects - I was just afraid it was not clear enough that the entire thing was said by his friend. Overthinking. I will revert it to the original text. Inspiration - ooops, will fix! Style - Ah, the word "scene" was the very word that eluded me yesterday. Will use that. Style item #2 - Your suggestions so much better. I was stuck in the raw translation of the text from the book, Will fix. Also look into the next thing about the grammar. Watercolor - Tnx! Among Gnomes and Trolls... - Will fix typos and sentence. Tnx, Tnx & Tnx! Re modernism, according to the books it came later in Sweden (remember: this is the boonies) and it did not filter into the academy where Bauer studied until later. The old geezers there had the Swedish art scene in a firm grip. More about this change in Einar Jolin my other GAN (which I can now tweak, thanks to you :) ). That was the first major article I worked on. The language in it is much better since it was co-written with and edited by Philg88. Is there any way I can halt it the GAN queue until I've tweaked it? I'll sort out the above things after one more comment at Ester, a shower and dinner. Best, w.carter-Talk 17:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: Article edits - all of your comments sound good Einar Jolin, I started the review page - putting it on hold for item #1. In the meantime I can work on assessment of items #2 and if any additional comments are needed re: 2+, I'll make them on the article talk page Modernism - thanks, makes sense!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:  Done — I think... Had a bit of trouble with the "An improvement for Bauer..." in the "Among G..." section. Hope this works. What's next here? Oh my, you started the review on Einar Jolin! Gosh! Well, at least you know what kind of crazy user you have to deal with now.:) w.carter-Talk 19:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: The edits looks good! I made a minor tweak to the notes about the modernist paintings. Yesterday I made some minor edits to the Legacy and Popular Culture section. I'm not seeing any other issues (re: Gnome section, etc.) right now. Next steps: 1. I'd like to read the article through one more time now, from start to finish (getting away from the trees and seeing the forest). Not that I'm expecting to find anything, but just to get a good sense of how the article flows now. 2. I think it would be good to solicit opinions from the editor that did copy-editing and others to see if there are any issues / concerns about the changes from a stability perspective. What do you think about this? How to approach it? 3. I sometimes toy with perrow change to 3 for the gallery - or "packing" the gallery since in my view it wraps to two rows with the second row having one image. But, I don't have strong feelings about it. 4. That's all I can think of - do you have anything else?--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC) Regarding Einar, I've not started the review yet, I just tagged a hold for copyediting - and I'll look at the items 2+ in the coming couple of days. No rush. If you'd like a time frame specified for the hold (a week, etc.), that works. By the way, to some of your earlier comments, it has very much been my pleasure working with you. I like that you're thoughtful, conscientious, and push-back on items that don't make sense to you (I forget what it was about earlier in the review).--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:I will very much enjoy working with you on Einar. You are clear, concise and adjust your tempo for the newbie while at the same time getting the job done. As for time on Einar, no need to specify anything. I have some time off this weekend, so I'll probably do most of the work then. 1. A read through, always a good idea. 2. By all means. There are some people that I think might have opinions about this article. Why don't I make a new section and invite them here for a look? 3. I don't have any strong opinion about the gallery. I was just being selfish about my computer screen. 4. Nope. Don't think so. If I do come up with something, there's always the FAN. :) --- w.carter-Talk 20:52, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter:Great! 1. Good. 2. Please. 3. I changed the mode to packed - see what you think. 4. Sounds like a good plan!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:59, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson:Packed is very good!! I saw it for the first time on Ester and it's really growing on me. w.carter-Talk 21:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @W.carter: I have a couple of questions: Should the section heading for "Tuvstarr" be in italics as in the title of the painting? Should "The fairy princess" be capitalized ("The Fairy Princess")? Update:  Done saw it was previously capitalized in the article--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC) Should "Karlskrona school for girls" be capitalized ("Karlskrona School for Girls"), for instance is it's name Karlskrona School for Girls vs. a school for girls in Karlskona? My inclination for #2 and 3 would be yes. I don't know about #1. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:13, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: No. Tuvstarr is just the name of the princess, not the name of the painting. All of Bauer's illustrations have long name equal to the section in the text which they illustrate. The caption at the pics is the exact title for it. Lucky you caught this since the painting is mentioned in the first sentence and that one is wrong. I'll correct it. Yes. Capital on Eng not Swe. Yes. Capital on Eng not Swe. It should be written: the Karlskrona flickläroverk (The Karlskrona School for Girls), missed that one. Tnx! -- w.carter-Talk 22:28, 3 September 2014 (UTC) @W.certer: Great! I made the change to the school name, am done rereading the article, and I'm reading to close out 1a.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:34, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

If you feel the final result of this review has been in error, you may request a reassessment. If the article failed to attain Good Article status after a full review, it may be easier to address any problems identified above, and simply renominate it.

Almost there

@Krenakarore:, @Onel5969:, @Alrich44:, @Siawase: @Philg88:, @EditorInTheRye:, @Demiurge1000: — Hello!

CaroleHenson is just wrapping up her excellent review of this article as a GAN. In some way or other you have all contributed to this expansion and your thoughts and opinions on the current state of the article and any issues / concerns about the changes from a stability perspective are most appreciated. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

It seems I never edited it. I'm happy to help, but, what was my involvement? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:40, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

@Demiurge1000:No, you never edited it, but you were the very first editor to encourage me to do this expansion and you gave me some really good advice on how to deal with the English language in the article and other Wiki-stuff related to it. I was very much a newbie then (just one of many to you so you probably don't remember) and afraid of my own shadow, but you gave me a push in the right direction - and here we are. I thought you were entitled to an opinion since you started this. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 21:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

@W.carter: Although I couldn't resist a couple of tweaks to the lede, it looks fine to me. Well done!  Philg88 ^♦talk 05:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@Philg88:It is your nature to c/e and tweak. :) And I always appreciate it! Cheers, w.carter-Talk 07:31, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello W.carter, I'm glad to see you reaching your goal. Congratulations! I will remember our experience, how this article brought John to life for me, and especially your sharing of what the Swedish people experience in nature, as it is what I experience too, but you again put it into words so well. Alrich44 (talk) 14:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@Alrich44:The way you re-wrote the intro was a big improvement for the article, the reviewer mentioned it as well written, thanks! w.carter-Talk 17:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello W.carter, You're welcome. Thank you for the kind words, keeping it real, and all the great material. We did well together. Alrich44 (talk) 23:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

What a wonderful, collaborative effort from the beginning of expansion until now! Thanks for the final copy edits, too. The article is now a Good Article.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

W.carter thank you!!! I appreciate Philg88 for taking the lede to its polished level. Alrich44 (talk) 16:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, wait, I do remember! You fought alongside my father in the Clone Wars, I think? Never be afraid of shadows is my advice - these days I'm only afraid of Americans. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

@Demiurge1000:—Quite so, our paths crossed now and again then. But it was a long tome ago, in a galaxy far, far away... w.carter-Talk 17:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• @W.carter: Nice job! I've been in the bg, following this progress. Congrats on the GA! Onel5969 (talk) 17:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
• —@Onel5969:Thank you! It wouldn't have been this good without your copy editing. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 17:40, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
• wow, I hardly recognise the article anymore, good effort! :) EditorInTheRye (talk) 19:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

And the work continues

Looking at some other art articles and checking with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Visual arts#Measurements I saw that the size of the works might be included in some way. I have the measurements for most of the pics. Should they be included somewhere? If not in the captions, maybe in a new section, notes, something... Just asking.

In the same book, I found a much better pic of The Fairy Princess. I couldn't upload it since the photo had a copyright, but I could use it as ref to "wash" the pic from Runeberg (printed on old yellowed paper with the text shining through), more info at Commons. I did the same with his self portrait. These two pics are originally oil paintings and the yellow tint in them is just because they were scanned from pics in old books or something. Most of the rest of Bauer's illustrations should not be "updated" in the same manner, since they are printed or painted on paper (gone yellow) so the originals now have a yellow tint. (Yes, I have seen them IRL.) :) Best, w.carter-Talk 11:54, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Others may have thoughts too, but mine are: Sure, if you'd like to add the size of the works to the captions that's fine.

Regarding the image being in/out of copyright, once it's in public domain - it's in public domain, but I don't know about whether versions adjusted for the yellow tint would mean that version is not in the public domain (i.e., instead the date is based upon date of adjustment vs. original work).

Personally, I would take this to Media copyright questions.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need for all the hassle with this or that photo. The present adjusted versions (which is allowed if it's done in the same file as the original) of the pics are now just as good as the ones I found in the book. If someone at the Commons think it's wrong, they'll just revert the change and the pic fades to yellow again. Very smooth and with no need to change files in the article. I've done it before with other pics and not been reverted. w.carter-Talk 16:22, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Makes sense. I've made similar kinds of changes to images for clarity, etc. and not had them reverted as well.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:31, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson:Thanks for your edits, there are facts in the article that existed before my expansion of it, such as Mortis. Btw, does anybody know how to archive at least some of this very long discussion? Best, w.carter-Talk 15:05, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@W.carter: Cool. Regarding archiving, I'm not sure what you mean... do you mean 1) older content on this talk page, 2) this particular subsection?, 3) something else.

At the risk of reiterating something you already familiar with - generally talk page content is archived oldest first.

It looks like Lowercase sigmabot III archived most recently (perhaps according to a schedule) - and OneClickArchiver has been used, too, by Philg88 for specific conversations.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:44, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson:No, that part now in the archive was archived long ago by Philg88 in 24 June (look at the date). :) I simply meant that it would look neater if some of the older and now less relevant post could be archived. w.carter-Talk 16:08, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson:Curious as I am I just clicked on the link you provided to "Oneclick..." So, it was just a script, huh? Well, script installed, Crome engaged and pages are arcived. All neat. :) Thanks! w.carter-Talk 16:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Cool! I've had discussions recently about synchronicity (as we discussed earlier) and order... which seems to be coming into play at WP, too! Dating myself (if "cool" didn't already do it): "far out".--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:44, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John Bauer (illustrator). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140827103938/http://www.oerlenbach.rhoen-saale.net/internet/index.php?page=21922 to http://www.oerlenbach.rhoen-saale.net/internet/index.php?page=21922
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304032804/http://www.mymap.se/produkter/pdf/mullsjo-karta.pdf to http://www.mymap.se/produkter/pdf/mullsjo-karta.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141013151231/http://www.sfi.se/sv/svensk-filmdatabas/Item/?itemid=47606&type=MOVIE&iv=Basic to http://www.sfi.se/sv/svensk-filmdatabas/Item/?itemid=47606&type=MOVIE&iv=Basic
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140908180533/http://johnjayandrich.iheart.com/iplaylist/album/952293/ to http://johnjayandrich.iheart.com/iplaylist/album/952293/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:John Bauer - Princess Tuvstarr gazing down into the dark waters of the forest tarn. - Google Art Project.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:John Bauer - Princess Tuvstarr gazing down into the dark waters of the forest tarn. - Google Art Project.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 19, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-06-19. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Picture of the day

A watercolor illustration by John Bauer (1882–1918) titled "Still, Tuvstarr sits and gazes down into the water", which accompanied Helge Kjellin's fairy tale "The Tale of the Moose Hop and the Little Princess Cotton Grass" in the 1913 edition of Among Gnomes and Trolls. In this scene, Tuvstarr looks for her lost heart in a tarn, symbolizing innocence lost.

Born and raised in Jönköping, Sweden, Bauer moved to Stockholm at age 16 to study at the Royal Swedish Academy of Fine Arts. He painted and illustrated in a romantic nationalistic style, in part influenced by the Italian Renaissance and Sami cultures. Most of his works are watercolors or prints in monochrome or muted colours; he also produced oil paintings and frescos.Painting: John Bauer

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on John Bauer (illustrator). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140929110751/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Den-unge-Bauer/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Den-unge-Bauer/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714170909/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Den-unge-Bauer/Villa-Sjovik/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Den-unge-Bauer/Villa-Sjovik/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714122439/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Den-unge-Bauer/Konstakademien/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Den-unge-Bauer/Konstakademien/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140929110803/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/John-o-Esther/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/John-o-Esther/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140929110808/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Nya-vagar/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Nya-vagar/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140829140747/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140929183328/http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Sagokonstnaren/Arbetsmetod/ to http://www.jkpglm.se/Samlingarna/Konst/Om-John-Bauer-pa-Jonkopings-lans-museum/Sagokonstnaren/Arbetsmetod/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:24, 27 November 2017 (UTC)