Talk:Hermaphrodite (Nadar)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Mark Arsten (talk · contribs) 03:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Will review, comments to follow within a few days. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Alright, as usual, I'm just going to write out all the comments I came up with when reading the article--not going to bother with the GA checklist or anything. Hope my comments are clear.

Lead

• Given the fairly short size of the article, I think it would be best to go with a one paragraph lead.
• I'm not sure Nadar's lifespan should be in the lead.

• Fair enough

• "Later photographs of subjects with hermaphroditism followed" very vague, might want to state "in 19th century France" or something.

• There's a German from 1930 as well, who seems to have had a bit of recognition for his photographs. How's this?

Background

• One of the most substantial comments I have is that it would be nice to have a mini-bio of Nadar in the background section, just a few sentences, i.e. Nadar (born 1820) went to med school, became a caricaturist, opened a photo studio, was well-regarded. The Journal of Sex Medicine would be a good source.

• Done

Looks good, I moved it to the beginning of the section, hope you don't mind. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• "In mid-1850's France, Adrien Tournachon photographed experiments with electrical stimulation of facial muscles" Is this the first known use of medical documentation photography in France?

• No; clarified

• Probably want to note Trousseau's occupation/position.

• Well, I figured "photographer Adrien Tournachon photographed" would be a pretty terrible read.

• I took a stab at it, how's this look? Mark Arsten (talk) 02:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, that's good.

• There's a quote from the MET citation that might be nice here, he was asked to photograph "with as much truth and art as you can."

• Done

Subject

• In one sentence here you have "rudimentary" three times, try to cut back on the repetition.

• Trimmed one, split into two sentences.

Series

• "gender queer feminist art journal" maybe just put journal, kind of distracting to list their positions all out.

• Done.

• Consider changing the list to prose here, I can try to help a bit with that.

• The list of photographs? I don't think that would turn out very well, unless we have sources for individual critiques (we don't, although I could bug someone to get that French book)

• Ok, not a deal breaker, I made a suggestion on the talk page though. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• Might want to note that Maisonneuve was present at an earlier part of the article.

• Done.

Post-photography

• "Nadar did not publish the photographs. However, in 1861 he copyrighted them" I'd combine these into one sentence. ditto for "Several photographs are at the Musée d'Orsay in Paris.[2] At least one is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MET) in New York"

• Done.

• Instead of "Doctors Dirk Schultheiss, Thomas R.W. Herrmann, and Udo Jonas..." I'd put "In The Journal of Sexual Medicine, Dirk Schultheiss, Thomas R.W. Herrmann, and Udo Jonas..."

• Done.

• "and at least one is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MET) in New York, as a bequest from Robert Shapazian" I'd consider removing the donor's name, not sure it adds anything here.

• Done.

• "According to Schultheiss, Herrmann, and Jonas, there is no evidence that the subject subsequently received treatment, something that was suggested in the Trousseau letter." Does the "suggested" in this sentence mean "advised" or "implied"? Consider using a different word.
• "They suggest several possible factors, including legal issues, the subject's refusal, or failed treatment followed by a lack of reporting." I'm also a little confused about this. Are these possible factors that prevented him from receiving treatment? Or possible reasons why evidence would not have turned up if he did? (I'm not sure if this is unclear or I'm being dense)

Legacy

• I'm not sure the bit about the American Civil War is really relevant here. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Done.

• Thanks for taking a look at this! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Done all. Your suggestion looks better than what I had worked up before saying no, so inserted. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, I'm now passing this. Impressive work digging all this up and writing a quality article, a worthy addition to our medical history coverage. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)