![]() | The Stone Breakers has been listed as one of the
Art and architecture good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: June 30, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | A fact from The Stone Breakers appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 23 June 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
There should be an explanation for where the illustration on this page came from. 115.64.142.162 ( talk) 06:12, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
BorgQueen (
talk) 13:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
5x expanded by Bruxton ( talk). Self-nominated at 22:31, 9 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Stone Breakers; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Overall, hook and article meet the criteria and the image used is free and clear. I made a slight edit in boldening the name of the article in the hook, but otherwise, should be good to go.
JJonahJackalope (
talk) 17:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Somewhat coyly, the article mentions there are two versions, but fails to mention that the second version (right) is in the Reinhart Collection at " Am Römerholz" in Winterthur. Somewhat less finished, and reversed, it may be later in date - most sources say "c.1849" - see for example [1] - but I suppose it could be an earlier oil sketch.
There is also an oil sketch of the main figure (right) which I understand there is in a private collection. And a pencil sketch of the other figure, in the Ashmolean. See [2] Theramin ( talk) 23:43, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Just so my comments at the end of the GA review don't get lost now the transcluded review has disappeared from this page, I've copied them here (below). It would be nice to get some of the detail from the source mentioned below into the article, if only so we can put a name to Monsieur Gagey. Theramin ( talk) 23:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't see the size comparison or letter as described in the article in the book cited as reference for this fact (Jessica Gunderson, Realism, 2008). Burial at Ornans is very much larger than the Stone Breakers--Burial at Ornans is 3.5m x 6.6m (source: wiki page on Burial at Ornans) whereas the Stone Breakers was 1.5 x 2.6 meters. I'm not sure where the reference to the letter is actually from, or why it would state that the two were similar in size. Lapidary6 ( talk) 12:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)