Talk:Boating Party

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Rowing vs. Paddling

[edit]

There is nothing in the image to show that this depicts Rowing vs. Paddling. Also, maybe I should find some text to distinguish this from paired rowing. I am not sure if I should link to sculling because he is not dressed for sport.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:24, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here.No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by TarnishedPath talk 06:30, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)
Boating Party by Gustave Caillebotte
Boating Party by Gustave Caillebotte
Boating Party by Gustave Caillebotte
Boating Party by Gustave Caillebotte
Boating Party by Gustave Caillebotte
Boating Party by Gustave Caillebotte
Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 378 past nominations.

TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC).[reply]

I don't know enough about art to say for certain which image is preferable. Thus, I am submitting both images that we have on commons. 4 of the 5 different language versions of the article use the one on the right.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:49, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Review
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - The hook sentence is sourced to Fox News which is often considered unreliable.
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - The hook states the value in US$ when the transaction appears to have been in Euro (€). Per MOS:€ the Euro has equal standing with the dollar and is more appropriate in this case, being the actual currency used.

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: It's a good artistic topic which should naturally be run in a picture hook slot. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:30, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I reckon that the word national should be lower case when embedded in this sentence so, with that proviso and the currency being Euro, the ALT1b hook is ok.
  • Fox News doesn't seem a suitable source for a French fine arts topic but, with the change of currency to Euro, it's not so relevant now.
All outstanding issues seem to have been addressed so we're good to go.
Andrew🐉(talk) 12:54, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
user:Andrew Davidson, my only qualm with the higher resolution file is the brown strip across the top. I am wondering if we could get a better file somewhere. Since the intention is to get this a picture slot at DYK, I am going to check at commons and see if there is anything we can do.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:14, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have opened a discussion at Commons:Commons:Help desk#Image_file_improvement.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:42, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: I hadn't noticed the brown strip but have tried cropping it off the top. See how you find that. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:08, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson:, I'm going to see if we have other options. Let's not rush this to the queue.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:51, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note Commons:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Improving_an_image. Can we put this aside for a few weeks. I am going to attend an Art Institute lecture on Caillebotte on August 7 and will try to bring decent camera equipment (I have a Canon EOS R5 Mark II that takes 45 megapixel shots) to get a better photo. Then I just have to crop out the frame.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:23, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I came here to move this forward, but I'm not sure what the issue is here. Is it just about the image? If the image is an issue, the hook could run without it. For what it's worth, I do think ALT2 is good and meets our guidelines, including those regarding interest. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:43, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • this and the image. I am going to visit the AIC on August 7 for a lecture on the painter of this image. I have requested that Canon send me a very fast prime lens (I am a member of Canon Professional Services which entitles me to request that they send me almost any piece of equipment to evaluate once for 10 days) to improve the image. They are going to ship (probably overnight) the lens next Monday. Currently, we have the low res image, high res with a band and cropped high res. I hope to get really good image. This is a really great picture slot hook. The main page viewers like high art. I'm pretty sure the hook will get 10k plus views in the picture slot, given my history with high art.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:53, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • this diff is clearer about adding a second article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 10:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the issue here is about images, couldn't the hook just run without a picture? That's an option, and there's no guarantee that this would run with an image anyway even if it was promoted. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:52, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I replied to you with a diff with an edit summary adding a second article. So obviously a second article needs to be reviewed. I do also think this article would be served by a better pic and am going to an event at the Art Institute of Chicago today to try to take one. This article is less than three weeks old, so what is the rush to get this to the approved section without making it the best article we can.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:36, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Use the first of 4 QPQs from Template:Did you know nominations/Ismail Thomas for the 2nd article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:44, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyTheTiger: National treasures of France is long enough and new enough. QPQ is done and Earwig is clean. I'm getting confused looking at this; what is the situation regarding hooks and images?--Launchballer 15:57, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Launchballer After seeing this work at the Art Institute of Chicago in July, I created this article. At one point this nomination was endorsed for the picture slot. (I don't recall ever having received such an approval before, but I do agree this would be an excellent choice, especially since fine art does pretty well in the picture slot in my experience). However, commons had three version of the painting: 1.) A low res version, 2.) A high res version with a tan band across the top and 3.) my crop of #2. Due to my inexperience in picture editing, I was unaware that the tan band represented tremendous editorial effort recovering picture data from shadows that resulted from taking the picture without a flash. I assumed I could go to the Art Institute of Chicago and retake the picture without such a band. However, I attended an August lecture about this exhibition and retook the photo. However, I too had a shadow in all of my pictures, and helpful folks at commons removed it in one version. There is was no consensus among involved editors and has been no consensus at Commons:Commons:Photography_critiques#Image_selection that anything I produced was significantly better. I will be attending another Art Institute lecture regarding this exhibition in late September. I am not so sure I will get any better result than we already have. What we have regarding a photo is not perfect, but I think we have sufficient depiction to present the subject in a picture slot. However, today an editor added {{cn}} content. I have been debating about reverting or trying to source the new content.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:41, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had meant 'what hooks/images do I need to verify', though I actually read the nomination this time. I'm going to approve all of the images visible on this page and let a promoter take their pick. ALT2, however, requires knowledge of what LVMH is to be interesting; if you're alright with the trimmed hook ALT2a: ... that Boating Party (pictured) was declared a national treasure of France, I'd be able to approve it. Regarding the {{cn}} content, that'll need removing or sourcing.--Launchballer 18:59, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Launchballer can we go with ALT3 ... that when Boating Party (pictured) was declared a national treasure of France, a €43 million donation enabled the French Republic to buy it?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:21, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have left comment at User talk:Boatsbycenturion regarding the unsourced content. I have also tried to source some of it and removed some of it already.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:21, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you not okay with Launchballer's proposal? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:35, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Narutolovehinata5, Doesn't a €43 million price tag make anything more interesting?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:10, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there is a problem with ALT3 try ALT3a ... that when Boating Party (pictured) was declared a national treasure of France, the French Republic bought it for €43 million?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:12, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's per WP:DYKTRIM. It's debatable if mentioning the exact amount is necessary to the hook fact. I'm not the reviewer though so I'll let someone else decide, I'm just pointing it out as advice. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:20, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review needed for the second nominated article, National treasure of France. Flibirigit (talk) 19:26, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I already reviewed the second article. I'm waiting for the unsourced content in Boating Party to resolve itself, at which point I will approve this.--Launchballer 19:28, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my WP:GAN got reviewed before I expected and I had done a WP:GARP for 2 reviews. Also, I was hoping for some response at User_talk:Boatsbycenturion#Boating_Party_edit. How long should I give for a response? Also, do you have any comments on ALT3a? As I mentioned above, a €43 million price tag makes anything more interesting, IMO.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:39, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: 3a?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:35, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Launchballer, the online sources that I see have the following content:
  1. The english version of this source (which is a WP:IC) says "the painter's framing, almost cinematic, is particularly striking. Here the viewer does not look at the painting.he boarded the boat, facing the rower in full effort. The reflections of the water almost seem to sparkle, as if the paint was still moving."
  2. This source (also an IC) clarifies that this is an impressionist work with content such as "emblematic and constitutive of the Impressionist aesthetic", but nothing about painterly details.
The content that was added really sounds like it came from somewhere legitimate. I am apt to just hide it until I can chase down sources after the exhibtion leaves town and high interest levels return to normal.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:52, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(I know you did. I watchlisted both the Blurred Lines and the Niggas in Paris GA subpages when I saw them at WP:GAN as I like both songs and spotted hooks when reading the articles, which I intend on driveby nominating if we aren't in backlog mode.) To answer your other questions; I usually issue reminders after a week, but on this occasion commenting out for now is probably the right call.--Launchballer 03:41, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeeted and warned. That is very much not on. Not sure an edit a week is enough to destabilise this, but a promoter might like to keep an eye out. Approving ALT2a and ALT3a and the three images visible on this page.--Launchballer 15:21, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Preference for 3a.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:27, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This has extensive WP:CLOP from musee-orsay.fr/en/whats-on/exhibitions/caillebotte-bequest. The Earwig report shows some of it, but it's really several running paragraphs which fit into CLOP's superficial modification of material from another source criterion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoySmith (talk • contribs) 14:45, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • marking this as rejected. See below for a passage from our article and the corresponding passage from the source. Please go read WP:CLOP. It talks about the superficial modification of material from another source which is exactly what this is. This is a fundamental concept and a core requirement. Somebody who has over 400,000 edits really should understand this by now. What an editor needs to do is summarize source material in their own words, not just shuffle sentences around and substitute synonyms until Earwig no longer triggers a warning. RoySmith (talk) 22:32, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Caillebotte, who was from a wealthy family, served as a supporter/patron of impressionists and assembled a collection of over 70 works of art from Paul Cézanne, Edgar Degas, Édouard Manet, Jean-François Millet, Claude Monet, Camille Pissarro, Pierre-Auguste Renoir, and Alfred Sisley. He willed sixty-eight paintings by Pissarro (nineteen), Monet (fourteen), Renoir (ten), Sisley (nine), Degas (seven), Cézanne (five), and Manet (four). In his will, he gave the French government this collection as a bequest with a directive that all of the paintings would be exhibited at the Musée du Luxembourg and then moved to the Louvre. However, Musée du Luxembourg was too small to accommodate the entire bequest. His brother Martial, his executor Renoir and the museum reached a compromise and accepted 40 works, just 38 by some sources, and 38 impressionists plus 2 works by Millet according to another, to become part of the national collection in 1896 and were unveiled in February 1897, bolstering the standing of Impressionism with the first presentation of the Impressionists in a public venue in France.
From a wealthy background, Caillebotte acquired more than seventy pieces by Cezanne, Degas, Manet, Millet, Monet, Pissarro, Renoir, and Sisley. He assembled a remarkable collection of modern art, a legacy for future generations, while providing financial support for his Impressionist friends. Indeed, in 1876, at only 28 years old, he wrote a will in which he bequeathed this collection to the French government. He stated that the paintings should all be exhibited at the Musée du Luxembourg in Paris (then called the "musée des artistes vivants"), then eventually moved to the Louvre.

The government initially accepted this bequest, but difficulties arose with exhibiting the works at the Musée du Luxembourg, which was too small and overcrowded. After lengthy discussions between Martial Caillebotte, the artist's brother, Renoir, the executor of his will, and the museums' administrative departments, a compromise was found: the bequest would only comprise a selection of forty works, but all of them would be exhibited. They became part of the national collections in 1896.

In February 1897, the Caillebotte room opened to the public. At that time, it was unprecedented to see such a large collection of Impressionist works in a museum. It was thanks to Caillebotte's generosity and determination that Impressionism finally gained official recognition in France.
  • @BlueMoonset and RoySmith:, If I had a pattern of bringing CLOPs to DYK, then I would understand your reaction, especially if RoySmith personally had cited CLOP issues multiple times in the past. This may be the first time 1000+ trips to DYK that I have been cited for WP:CLOP, so reacting like I have a huge problem is quite a bit of an overreaction. We are all here trying to help out. I'll take a look at this a bit later, but you are going to a 4th level reaction to a misunderstanding of the issue on first response.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:35, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It means this needs someone else to tick it off. I just examined the Boating Party article and can tick it off; the National treasures of France article has never been in dispute.--Launchballer 10:30, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What does Use the first of 4 QPQs from Template:Did you know nominations/Ismail Thomas for the 2nd article mean? RoySmith (talk) 10:56, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It means Ismail Thomas is a quadruple nom and Tony hasn't used any of the QPQs from it yet. I interpreted that as 'I use the review for the article Ismail Thomas as my QPQ for the National treasures article'.--Launchballer 11:03, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced content.

[edit]

Last week, I removed the following content:

Today User:Launchballer removed the following content citing WP:ONUS:

  • The painting's composition utilizes a low viewpoint that places the viewer at water level, creating an intimate perspective unusual for the period. Caillebotte's brushwork combines the loose, impressionistic technique characteristic of the movement with areas of more precise detail, particularly in the rendering of the oarsman's clothing and the boat's structure.
  • Upon its acquisition and public display, *Boating Party* received significant attention from art critics and scholars. The work has been praised for its innovative perspective and technical execution, particularly Caillebotte's ability to convey the immediacy of the rowing action.
  • Art historians have noted the painting's contribution to understanding the leisure activities of the French upper class during the late 19th century, as well as its place within the broader context of Impressionist depictions of modern life.
This content can be readded with WP:IC from WP:RS to enable WP:V. Content added without ICs will be considered WP:OR and likely removed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:22, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Content removals

[edit]

I find many interesting facts have been removed from the article:

User:Launchballer edits

[edit]
  • In order to eliminate a DYK objection, Launchballer's edits removed all statements to Caillebotte's family wealth and details of his storied bequest. I am not convinced that these topics are remote from this subject.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:21, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Two specific points:
      while he was alive, his wealth diminished his urgency to sell his artwork.
      Caillebotte, who was from a wealthy family, served as a supporter/patron of impressionists and assembled a collection of over 70 works
      Without the content regarding his bequest, "The bequest did not include his own works. Martial Caillebotte inherited 175 of his brother's works. The fact that he bequeathed his own works to his own family rather than a public museum is why Caillebotte's own contributions to Impressionism as a painter continue to lag behind his reputation as an important millionaire collector and donor of Impressionist art." becomes moot, which is why you removed it.
@Launchballer:, can we talk about these facts?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:02, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't actually remove that paragraph to solve the raised DYK issue, although it had that effect. I took it out because I don't see the relevance of an unrelated bequest to this article per WP:COATRACK. I subsequently removed the 'diminished his urgency' bit because the source doesn't seem to mention the painting by name, so I question its dueness. With the benefit of a bit longer, I can live with 'Caillebotte was from a wealthy family', but I'd want a source that mentions the painting.--Launchballer 15:23, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Launchballer both points above regarding his wealth have been restored with a suitable reference.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:40, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fine now.--Launchballer 01:06, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:AirshipJungleman29 edits

[edit]

User:Viriditas edits

[edit]
  • I personally requested a second opinion on recent edits. Viriditas's edits removed association of this work with French Impressionism in the WP:LEAD paragraph. I believe that a painting should include a description of its artistic style in the LEAD paragraph.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:21, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    He's a French painter associated with Impressionism. He painted during a transitional time between the styles of realism and Impressionism. Calling him a French painter first and foremost is neutral and accurate. In the past there was a preference for associating each painter with a specific style, but IMO, that has fallen out of fashion unless that artist is only primarily known for one style, school, and movement. To your point, Distel refers to him as a "painter, avant-garde collector, and benefactor", but also as an impressionist painter. She also argues against this characterization in terms of categories, noting on p. 15 "that the issue was not and is not how such labels define Caillebotte, but how he redefines them...Yet an artwork that arises from within countless overlapping contexts is not finally determined by any; it has a specificity that emerges from the the unique convergence of many in its creation, and then expands in meaning through still others..." On p. 22, it is revealed that Caillebotte also categorized some of his other paintings as post-Impressionist. Was he best categorized as a French Impressionist? I do not know. All I know is that this issue has come up thousands of times with other biographical subjects, and the way we usually handle it is by noting their nationality, their profession, and the various movements they are associated with, if any. So it might make sense to make a note in the lead that he was both a benefactor of the Impressionists and a contributor to their exhibitions. You say that a painting should include a description of its artistic style in the lead, but I don't think this is generally true. You're assuming this is true of every artist. It most certainly is not. Yes, Caillebotte is associated with the Impressionists. Yes, he showed his work with them. But you know, non-Impressionists also showed their work with them. Look at Floor Scrapers for one example. Wikipedia editors have spent a great deal of time trying to make this an Impressionist work in the article, but it really isn't considered one, it's a realist work. This fact generally escapes a lot of people. In any case, let's be mindful of who came up with these categories and how they are used. The concept of "Impressionism" was not something invented by the artists. It was created and promoted by the reviewers and the audience to describe something new that they couldn't understand to fit it into the marketing paradigm of buying and selling art. This is an incredibly common theme in history. Labels and categories come much later, and very often people are pigeonholed into those categories. By the early 20th century, the American modernists had staged a full on rebellion to this state of affairs. And if you are a fan of black and white thinking, there's only one Impressionist that fits the strict definition of Impressionism–Monet. In any case, we can find many examples where Caillebotte is not referred to as a French Impressionist and his work is not described as Impressionist; In addition to Floor Scrapers, Paris Street; Rainy Day is yet another in that series. The question then becomes, is Boating Party produced in the style of Impressionism? What are those qualities? Describe them in the article. How is it different than his other paintings in this regard? Once you answer those questions, you'll have your answer and your new body and lead. Viriditas (talk) 02:14, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Boating Party seems to clearly be a product of Impressionism. You can zoom in on the type of painterly technique employed. You can see the broad dabs of solid colors used to present the scene. Unlike Paris Street; Rainy Day, this is almost entirely a product of dabs of paint expertly placed. I have decided I would do serious research on this work a few months down the line when it will be easier to gather library materials. While Caillebotte is on exhibition in town, such research will be frustrating. The 2023 press does not describe the Impressionist elements of the work other than to mention that it was presented in one of the 5 Impressionism exhibitions that Caillebotte funded and organized. It seems to be the featured work for the celebration of the 150th anniversary of Impressionism as well, which means some people feel it should be associated with Impressionism.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:05, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Tony, the additional research down the line is a great idea, and I totally feel you on having to schedule library visits so far in advance for more specialized research like this. I would just caution against making assumptions (even well-informed assumptions) about stylistic qualities of visual art when writing on Wikipedia. The first three sentences in your above reply are essentially original research; you're personally analyzing a work of art for its stylistic qualities and making assumptions about its categorization, instead of relying on published analysis by critics, reporters, curators, or scholars. I hope I'm not coming off as overly critical, but this is a really essential part of editing visual arts articles. It's really not appropriate to do any visual analysis of a work of art yourself beyond the simplest observations like "The painting depicts a boat"; anything more advanced, including analysis of the painting technique or movement categorization, should be coming from a reliable source.
      Thanks for your work to improve this and other visual arts articles! 19h00s (talk) 12:10, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • User:19h00s, Thx. As the page creator, I am a bit too close to the article to see it that way. I sort of feel like the fact that the painting depicts a man rowing a boat on the river from close-up is all clear and undeniable. I also feel like I can see he dabbed paint rather than broadly stroked paint. I guess the latter is a bit of OR. But, by the end of the year or early 2026, the Chicago Public Library should be back in order regarding the subject and I will give it a good look.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        Tony, I'm currently on vacation for the next week, but send me an email when you can and I will attach sources you can use as I find them. Also, if you are attending this lecture on Saturday, you can probably ask Gloria Groom questions about this issue.[5] She takes the position that Caillebotte is indeed, the "least-known of the Impressionist painters".[6] If you're not going to the lecture, they are sometimes uploaded to YouTube or elsewhere. Also, in terms of sources, your local library should have this book, which appears to have good material on the painting in question you can add. Viriditas (talk) 01:13, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]