Talk:Adélaïde Ducluzeau/GA1: Difference between revisions

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

Nominator: CounterpointStitch (talk · contribs) 11:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Rollinginhisgrave (talk · contribs) 09:59, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll grab this one. It’s a nice article, a few changes for tone needed and caution around primary sources but otherwise okay. Note: this review is part of my pledge for the review at Talk:Tamale pie/GA1.

• modest private art school and of comfortable means come across as euphemistic.
• Consistency of Durand / Durand-Ducluzeau should be cleaned up before marriage.
• “is recognised as one of the most accomplished porcelain painters at Sèvres” attribute this
• “her talents were not fully recognised by the administration at Sèvres” Better here to be explicit along the lines of “contemporaries expressed doubt in her technical abilities”. Whether someone is talented is ultimately a subjective determination, and we can permit the reader to draw their own inferences.
• “but also the gendered disparities common in the manufactory” again, this goes a bit too far into the tone of an essay. If you are saying she was paid 2,000 francs for the same designs as a male artist, either attribute the gendered disparities commentary or leave it for the reader. Doing the latter also gives the advantage of more punchy prose.
• “Antoine Béranger” who? This reads like we should know who this is.
• Could you clarify “based on direct observation”?
• “These works exemplify the continued importance of court art at Sèvres…” more essay tone.
• The infobox gives the wrong date of death
• “She died prematurely during the Paris cholera epidemic of 1849″.

Suggestions

Sources appear to be generally reliable. Article is based on modern, secondary sources, with primary sources elaborating on points. Much to my disappointment I don’t speak French, so hopefully you can be patient with me as I try to verify claims in French sources. I will say that you should be citing page numbers for these long documents that are not in English, as it is otherwise very hard to verify information.

Spot check from [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ad%C3%A9la%C3%AFde_Ducluzeau&oldid=1330799901 this :

Other:

• Can you quote the text verifying “A “Mlle Ducluzeau” living at nearby 8 ter rue Furstemberg, is likely her daughter.”?
• [1] is a good link for The Sèvres porcelain manufactory. Individual pages can be linked directly even without access, for instance [2]. Regular access can be obtained via the process outlined at Wikipedia:Internet Archive print disability access.

Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 09:59, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks so much for doing this. I think you’ve raised a lot of good points which will improve the article. I can’t address all of them now, so I’ll stick with the “Sources” section for now.

• [5] I’ve added a page number (44). The full text is about the drawing which illustrates the article (in short, a bust portrait in pencil of Ducluzeau wearing a frilly collar by her sister Madame Rullier): “Dessin au crayon noir. / En buste, de trois quarts, à droite ; indication de vêtement ; col tuyauté. / Madame RULLIER était la soeur de madame DUCLUZEAU. / Don de madame Pillaut, fille de madame RULLIER.” The Salon catalogues cited shortly after give Rullier’s name as Joséphine, should I add one here too?
• [10] That’s correct
• Most of the claim was based on the timeline cited as [19], though the elements are also found throughout the whole book [20], (e.g. p.328 “Due to the close unit community of workers at Sèvres, women had been added to the workforce at an early stage, though primarily as painters, gilders and burnishers.”
• [25] Very good catch! I was using the number on her death certificate. No idea which, if either, is incorrect, so I’ve removed the number altogether.

Other:

• I did wonder if this is straying into OR/PRIMARY as no secondary sources state this explicitly. I added the line as she has the same address as Ducluzeau’s daughter on her wedding certificate at around the same time – and has the same unusual surname (though spelled slightly differently). Is there a WP compliant way of saying this?
• I’ll have a look, thank you

CounterpointStitch (talk) 13:52, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Now addressing Prose and Content:

I’ve followed all of your advice, also removing essay-like phrases. A few questions:

• “Consistency of Durand / Durand-Ducluzeau should be cleaned up before marriage”. I wasn’t sure what was appropriate – do I address her as Durand-Ducluzeau throughout the article, or do I refer to her as Durand in all sections before her marriage?
• “‘is recognised as one of the most accomplished porcelain painters at Sèvres’ attribute this.” This is from the book I cite at the end of the sentence, however the section it is from only gives the initials of the author, and I can’t find a full name elsewhere in the book. What’s the best way to address this?
• “Could you clarify ‘based on direct observation'”? This was my attempt at expressing [27] “d’après nature”, I’ve added “based on direct observation rather than copying of other artworks“?

CounterpointStitch (talk) 14:31, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]