Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Joseph Grimaldi/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 08:25, 15 December 2012 [1].

Joseph Grimaldi edit

Featured article candidates/Joseph Grimaldi/archive1

Nominator(s): Cassianto ^Talk 13:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The actor Joseph Grimaldi is perhaps best known for his invention of the modern day white-face clown. His portrayal and design of the pantomime character Clown made it into a leading role in the Harlequinade from his day forward and was one of the most important British theatrical designs of the last three hundred years. He was a prolific performer in Christmas pantomimes and Harlequinades of the early 1800s, and he became associated with some of the biggest and most extravagant theatres of the day, including the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane. Despite his success, his stage career was plagued by injury and then ill health, leading to his early retirement and depression in later years. Having worked on the article for many months, and after a peer review and GA review, I now feel that it meets all of the required criteria to be considered featured content and would gladly invite any comments (or custard pies) one would have to offer. -- Cassianto ^Talk 13:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support as contributor. I have done extensive copy-editing, as well as some research, for this article and helped Cassianto to respond to the peer review. I believe that it now satisfies the FA criteria and congratulate Cassianto on his fine work. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - a superb article, well written and thoroughly researched and which meets the criteria for FA status in my opinion. Jack1956 (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, a huge thanks SS for making this FAC possible with all your help and guidence and to Jack for providing Grimaldis "too weak to stand" image. It's great that the article has your support. -- Cassianto ^Talk 11:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - ~~mostly~~ OK (PD-old or similar), author and source provided. Some comments ~~and a minor issue~~:

File:Joseph_Grimaldi_by_John_Cawse.jpg - OK (was claimed as copyrighted, however this claim was generally rejected, see summary).
File:Joseph-Grimaldi-1828.jpg - OK. Could be uploaded to commons (not relevant for FA, just saying).
~~Some cleanup needed: almost all images should have PD-art template with first license as parameter. See Commons:Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag for more information.~~ GermanJoe (talk) 08:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, all images were checked and checked again by Crisco 1492 during the peer review and I don't think the pd-art issue was even mentioned. With that in mind, I went to the link you provided but it is dead so I couldn't read up on it. Also, I know some could be moved to commons (I don't know how to do this), but it's not important for FAC so I won't chase up experts this early on. If you know and have time, then please feel free. -- Cassianto ^Talk 11:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Fixed the link) The commons move is not required, as already mentioned above it was a mere information for further improvement. GJ 12:17, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

further to the pd-art concern, I have gone through the images, using the commons guideline, and added the art tag to those images that fitted within the guidelines. I think I caught them all but you may wish to check and report back. Thanks for reviewing. -- Cassianto ^Talk 13:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have updated the status, thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 15:55, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support – I've watched the progress of this article from the sidelines, and am impressed. It seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. It is comprehensive but not discursive; the documentation is thorough and wide ranging; the prose is good; and the illustrations are spot-on. A fine article; I am very pleased to add my support for its elevation. – Tim riley (talk) 11:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise Tim, thanks for all your advice over the last few months. Your support means a lot. -- Cassianto ^Talk 13:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~ - looking good, an enchanting read. ~~Will jot queries below:~~ Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Although jubilant at the birth of his first son, Giuseppe Grimaldi spent little time with Brooker, living mostly with Perry, but probably maintaining other mistresses as well~~ ~~- the "but" doesn't strike me as contrastive where it is, so I'd think an "and" was better....~~

Done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 13:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~sustained his first known major injury while performing at Sadler's Wells in 1785.~~ ~~-as a doctor I was curious to know what the injury was...~~

I have rechecked Findlater who states: "One evening, when this feat was in the act of performance, the chain broke, and he was hurled a considerable distance into the pit, fortunately without sustaining the slightest injury – for he was flung into the arms of an old gentleman who was sitting gazing at the stage with intense interest." Since corrected. -- Cassianto ^Talk 13:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: This is a very well-prepared article. I gave it a long peer review, and I was by no means the only hand active at PR. The issues raised by me and others were adequately addressed, and I have no doubt that the article meets the criteria now. Too late for TFA on this year's birthday, but I'm sure other opportunties will arise. Would this be the first clown to grace the main page? (think carefully before answering) Brianboulton (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments at peer review were an essential part of the articles development and I cannot thank you enough for that. Your support here is very much appreciated. -- Cassianto ^Talk 16:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton, I am sure there have been lots of clowns on the main page - possibly all of them politicians. :-) -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I gave a fairly in depth peer review. Based on the changes since, I have a few comments:

Grimaldi originated the Clown catchphrase "Here we are again!", which is still used by pantomime Clowns - What's with the capital Cs?

Corrected. -- Cassianto ^Talk 11:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clown with a capital C means the character in the Harlequinade called "Clown". All the characters in the Harlequinade are different kinds of clowns, but only one is called "Clown". It is a proper noun. I'll restore it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:06, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Along with Bologna, he re-appeared briefly at Sadler's Wells where he gave some acting instruction to the eighteen-year-old William Payne, who became a well-known mime artist and was father of the Payne Brothers. - That's a little too extended. You should cut back some detail on Payne.

Trimmed. -- Cassianto ^Talk 11:05, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What makes It's Behind You a good EL? Clowns Gallery & Museum is a dead link. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~No idea, deleted. I have replaced it with a British Museum link and tidied the others.~~ After some research, I have decided to reinstate this 11 year old website based on the following findings:

TheFreeLibrary says: "Another resource you may wish to try is an excellent website devoted to the development of pantomime and its roots in music-hall tradition. Click on www.its-behind-you.com." See this, this and this. Other praise includes: this, and this, but perhaps most reliable of all is this, which is taken from Exeter University Library and is widely used in studies there. -- Cassianto ^Talk

I've used this as a reference in the article, so moved it out of ELs. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:44, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright guys, that's fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:56, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments Crisco and for your invaluable input at peer review. -- Cassianto ^Talk 11:05, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose and images, per my comments here and at PR. Very well put-together article, glad to see it. Hope we have an actual clown on the MP soon. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~ Support. The article is quite thorough and well written. Apart from some minor grammatical errors, I only have two complaints. First, the article is a bit tedious and overly detailed in parts. There are numerous places where it could be more concise without losing the essential narrative of the article. I'll leave it to your judgement where to trim, but some examples that stuck out to me were short digressions or random details such as the following unnecessary sentences:

The production, like Peter Wilkins, also featured two adult Harlequins, two Columbines and a female Pantaloon.

Deleted. -- Cassianto ^Talk 20:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Later in 1810, Grimaldi appeared in Birmingham in a benefit performance in aid of his sister-in-law, who had been forced into early retirement as a result of the riots the previous year.

Trimmed. -- Cassianto ^Talk 20:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

During a benefit in October 1814, Grimaldi fell ill and was housebound for four months.

Kept, as I feel this is important to show the start of his real decline in health. -- Cassianto ^Talk 20:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In December, Grimaldi's friend, mentor and former father-in-law, Richard Hughes, died at home while Grimaldi was in mid-season performing in pantomime.

Trimmed. -- Cassianto ^Talk 20:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The production transferred to the Haymarket Theatre where it completed its run.

Kept, to prevent one guessing where the production ended up, did it finish? Did it continue? Where? Etc... -- Cassianto ^Talk 20:29, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These are just some examples, and you may not agree with them. There were also some sections that perhaps could have been summarized rather than presented in detail such as his falling out with Thomas Dibdin or the biography of Grimaldi's father. Basically, I would like to see the article tightened up a bit so that we don't lose the reader's interest.

I took the liberty of trimming the info about Dibdin and Grimaldi's father a bit. I notice that Cassianto tightened up a few other points. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He did. -- Cassianto ^Talk 21:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, I was expecting the legacy section to mention something about his influence on the field of clowning. He seems like he must have been a fairly important clown in the history of clowns, but the legacy section doesn't really give me any idea of how he is perceived by clown historians or later generations of clowns. Perhaps I'm overestimating his importance, though. I'm not sure.

I see that Cassianto has now added some material about this to the Legacy section. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, your beating me to it. Yes, all done, I hope to your liking Kaldari. -- Cassianto ^Talk 21:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatical errors include the following:

"Although, Jack Bologna" should be "Although Jack Bologna"

Yes, fixed. -- Cassianto ^Talk 12:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It uses both "Mr. Ford's Academy" and "Mr Ford's Academy"

An excellent spot! American period removed, now consistent. -- Cassianto ^Talk 12:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

", there is no record of him ever sending money to his father." I would use a period or semicolon here instead of a comma. Better yet, I would remove the clause entirely as it seems like an unnecessary digression.

I have used a semicolon for now as I feel it helps understand just how bad JS was towards his parents. The estranged relationship had a detrimental effect on Grimaldi's health. Anybody think differently? -- Cassianto ^Talk 12:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There were two semicolons in the sentence, so I broke it into two sentences. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, cheers. -- Cassianto ^Talk 21:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, excellent work on the article and congratulations on not having your article blighted with a crufty infobox! I'm not a regular at FAC, so I may not be responsive to questions/comments here. If you need anything, just ping me on my talk page. Cheers! Kaldari (talk) 07:51, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is looking better. I'm a bit disappointed that the new legacy section is merely a quotefarm. Perhaps some prose could be added and the quotes used as citations instead. Notably, I was expecting some elaboration on the text from the lead: "[Grimaldi] became best known for his development of the modern day white-face clown. In the early 1800s, he popularised the role of Clown in the harlequinade". Neither of these statements seem to be directly addressed in the body. Basically, I'm looking for an explanation of why Joseph Grimaldi is considered important (from a modern point of view). What influences did he make that lasted beyond his lifetime? A few quotes wouldn't hurt, but we need some sort of expert summary as to what his legacy actually was. Kaldari (talk) 22:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The part about his development of the modern day white-face clown, is mentioned in terms of the make-up design lower down. It was really from this point that the look devolved into what is considered today as being the white-face clown. -- Cassianto ^Talk 14:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think all of my concerns have been addresses, so changing to Support. Kaldari (talk) 00:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks for your excellent review and support. It's surprising what was missing this late on. Thank you :) -- Cassianto ^Talk 10:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from GuillaumeTell

Lead

Para 3: is it wise to link to Robinson Crusoe? The article is about the book and the only reference to pantomime is buried near the bottom.

Link deleted. Or would it be better to link to the pantomime section in Robinson Crusoe? -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:10, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there isn't a pantomime section, just Robinson_Crusoe#Stage_and_film where Offenbach's Robinson Crusoé (premiered long after Grimaldi's death) gets a mention. There's no mention of Crusoe in Pantomime however - you could perhaps insert a section there and link to that? (Or to Robinsonade (?!), but perhaps not.)

I have done just that (not Robinsonade) and added a bit in the Crusoe article. Now linked to that. -- Cassianto ^Talk 14:38, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Family background

Links to harlequinade characters are all over the place - the Clown link to Harlequinade#Clown in the Lead is OK, but Pantaloon just goes to Harlequinade and it's overlinked in the first 2 paras; Harlequin and Pierrot are linked to their own articles rather than to the Harlequinade sections

Done, done and done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note 3, second sentence: "He encouraged Rebecca's career and secured her minor roles in various London theatres." - secured her for minor roles... or secured for her minor roles...?

He secured minor roles for her. Done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Early years

Clown just links to Harlequinade

Now links to Clown. -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lodoiska: I'd add that the music was a mixture from separate operas of the same name by Rodolphe Kreutzer and Luigi Cherubini with additions by Stephen Storace. It was performed as an afterpiece (info from Grove Opera).

Thanks for that. Do you have a page number? -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, p. 1303-4, article by Jane Girdham. There's also a Lodoiska drawing by Thomas Greenwood the elder on p.533 - he was a resident scene painter at Drury Lane, died in 1797.

Great, many thanks for that GT. Now mentioned. -- Cassianto ^Talk 14:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the next section, Lodoiska links only to Cherubini's opera - better to delink it.

Doesn't appear to be linked :-s -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's linked in the Last years at Drury Lane section, with footnote 81. I've no idea whether this relates to the Kemble/Storace work or to the other Lodoiskas.

Got it, delinked. -- Cassianto ^Talk 14:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Trip to Scarborough is by Sheridan and should be linked; is Rule a Wife and Have a Wife Fletcher's 1640 play? If not, whose was it?

Now linked. Yes this was Fletcher, also linked. -- Cassianto ^Talk 19:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Last years at Drury Lane

Copy-edited this section, complete with edit-conflict which I hope I haven't messed up. One extra comment: "Harlequin Amulet; or, The Magick of Mona, with Grimaldi as Punch, the lead clown". I think there should be a Punch link, but Punchinello and Mr Punch don't fit, and Punch doesn't appear in Harlequinade. Maybe Punch?

Done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 20:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Covent Garden years

More copy-editing and linking. One query: "In early 1815, Grimaldi and his son played father and son Clowns in Harlequin and Fortunio; or, Shing-Moo and Thun-Ton, the first known pantomime to feature a principal boy" - does this mean that JS was the first principal boy, in which case he doesn't count as a principal boy as we understand the term? Or was the principal boy a female - in which case, who was she?

Definatley not JS. I don't think MCS elaborates but I will check when I get in. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checked and Maria de Camp was the player in what was then known as a breeches role. It would evolve into the modern day principal boy role fifty years later. -- Cassianto ^Talk 00:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I've now finished copy-editing and nit-picking and am very happy to support promotion to FA.--GuillaumeTell 18:29, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I had my say at an earlier peer review and was happy enough with it then: since that point the article has been improved even further. - SchroCat (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks SchroCat for your brilliant comments at peer review on a subject, which I hope you won't mind me saying, is slightly different to what your used to reviewing, and GT, for your knowledge on theatre pieces and operas which has resulted in some late but invaluable additions to the article. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review and spotchecks

Checks of online sources found no close paraphrasing or verifiability issues
McConell or McConnell, Scott or Stott?

Done and done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FN45: full citation?

Now given. -- Cassianto ^Talk 11:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mayer or Mayers?

Mayer, done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where author and date are available (ex. FNs 181 and 178), it's good practice to include them

Thanks. Now edited correctly. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mayer: where in Massachusetts?

Cambridge, done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Location for Thomson?

Cambridge, U.K. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"the The Public Domain Review"? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Cassianto ^Talk 23:09, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~ by Blofeld

"The Drury Lane season ran from September to the late spring , and Sadler's Wells played from 15 April to the second week in October." Confused which year you are referring to September 1781 or September 1782 to Spring 1783, or every season it ran from September to the late spring and 15 April to October you mean 1782? - please clarify.

Every year, although which year this ceased (if it has) I don't know. I expect the seasons are slightly different nowadays. -- Cassianto ^Talk 15:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Grimaldi originated the catchphrase "Here we are again!", which is still used in pantomime.[57][58] He also was known for the mischievous catchphrase "Shall I?", which prompted audience members to respond "Yes!"" That's very notable I'd say and worthy of mentioning in the lead.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:47, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned, although is it that notable enough to be mentioned within the first para? -- Cassianto ^Talk 15:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that "Here we are again" is worthy of the LEAD. Less sure of "Shall I", in the Lead. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree. Dr. B, any objections to removing "Shall I" as "Here we are again" is more well known. -- Cassianto ^Talk 18:42, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh both are annual I see. Strange for same dates every year that's all as some days could be Sundays etc. Here we go again is fine both. Definitely a thoroughly enjoyable and satisfactory read and worthy of FA status, I can see how much work and time has gone into this. You have my support.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 23:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm middle-aged, well-traveled, and well-read and have never heard either of those phrases in my entire life. Perhaps they are of more relevance to Brits (or Euros)? Kaldari (talk) 23:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "Here we are again!" is still used in British pantomime 200 years after Grimaldi coined it. Every Christmas, the most prestigious British theatres stage elaborate pantomimes, and we in America know almost nothing about it! Here is a listing of 20 pantomimes being produced in London alone this holiday season. In the 19th century, pantomime was even more popular and was given year-round in some theatres. I remember finding out about pantomime on perhaps my third or fourth trip to the U.K. Kaldari, we should really feel quite ashamed of ourselves! Thanks to this article, we get a chance, perhaps, to educate a few of our countrymen. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:47, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate notes -- Ten supports in barely a week, I wonder if this is a record. Anyway, it's always nice to see clear consensus arising from thoughtful reviews. Couple of things in the lead, though:

It doesn't seem to have bothered others but I'm a bit dubious about a quote in the first sentence, especially when it's not particularly memorable in itself, nor from a particularly notable (though reliable) source. Did you use it because you wanted to convey his place among the entertainers of his era, and couldn't put it into sufficiently different words to avoid our close paraphrasing guidelines?

I converted the quote into a regular sentence. I think it avoids any "close paraphrasing" problem, even though it uses several words from the quote, because they are simply an assertion of fact. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"In his last years, Grimaldi was living in relative obscurity and became a depressed alcoholic living in poverty." -- can we avoid repetition of "living in"? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I took a stab at restating that. Feel free to rewrite, Cassianto. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tks Ss. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:57, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it looks all good to me. A big thank you to everyone who has taken part in this FAC and who have helped out on the article. I am ecstatic that all the hard work has eventually paid off with Joey's promotion to FA. -- Cassianto ^Talk 09:50, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.