This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group. Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles France Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: Sitwell, Sacheverell (1967). Baroque and Rococo. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. pp. 60–65 – via the Internet Archive. Pages in question feature the review of Callot’s work and particularly Balli di Sfessania.{{ cite book}}: CS1 maint: postscript ( link)

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC) reply

The word "brilliantly" has been removed from the article as per WP:PEACOCK. A request for an objective meaning for the term and proof that the subject meets the objective meaning has been ignored.

The term had been removed before, with this edit, but was replaced with this edit and the summary "justified, and removal makes nonsense of the sentence". As stated before, a request was made asking how the term was justified, to which ther has been no reply.

I had considered replacing the word "brilliantly" with the less emotional "highly" but I realize that "highly" is still subjective. Surely there must be some objective way to quantify this "brilliance".

Sincerely, SamBlob ( talk) 01:51, 28 October 2013 (UTC) reply