Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Seth Rogen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Seth Rogen
Project has been significantly updated from its original incarnation. See me let go 22:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nat91
The article has been significantly improved indeed! But it's still a start article. It needs more information and improvements. Some suggestions:
- Expand the lead. See WP:LEAD
- The picture in the infobox is too big. Size it. 240/250px is a good size.
- In my opinion, the article has too many pictures and very short content. Also, some of them do not have a fair use rationale.
- After "Biography", you could put another section called "Early life" or "Personal life" and expand it.
- "Early career" is also a stubby section. Work on that.
On a side note, there's a "Frat Pack"? There is no originality anymore! Nat91 05:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thank you for the suggestions. I've removed some images, added a few sections, added many references and generally expanded what I submitted earlier. Any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated. See me let go 12:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Yannismarou
Nice, in general. This is my review:
- "Universal Pictures gave the ok to cast". I think this expression is a bit uncyclopedic. I'd suggest rephrasing.
- "Influences" can't be a sub-section of his personal life. Something is obviously wrong there. In any case I also believe that this article should be placed befor his "Career" sections along with early life information. Another strucuring you could do: Remove "Biography" heading - create a seperate section "(Early years and) Personal life (or any other title you choose)" before the "career" sections and then start a "Career" section with the relevant sub-sections ou already have.
- I think you could further expand "Influences" by adding critics, evaluations etc.
- I always speak about the importance of verifiable printed sources apart of magazines. I don't know if there is any available in this case.
- "External link" go after "References".
- Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
- All your photos are fair-used tagged. In FAC this could be a problem.--Yannismarou 12:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thank you, I'll get to fixing those areas within the weekend. Question though... It seems like every entertainment bio I see has some kind of Image use violation. I, and probably many other users, am not quite sure what kind of images are allowed. I've read the lengthy descriptions, and still have trouble understanding which are the appropriate ones. Any quick tips? See me let go 07:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- You are right. This is a general problem. That is also why in FAC there is no clear policy on this issue. I just have to point out that, when in FAC the reviewers see more than 2-3 fair-use-tagged photos, they tend to be critical. But I repeat that the whole problem is not yet clarified and that I'm not a specialist in photo copyrights. I just wanted to warn you for possible criticisms, when and if you decide to go for FAC.--Yannismarou 08:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Thank you so much. I really appreciate the feedback, and the looking out for future problems. It's much better to be aware of potential problems before someone else immediately pulls the images. Hopefully, there will be some clear FAC guidelines so we can all start editing in the appropriate manner. Again, thanks! See me let go 08:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Plange
First of all, great job in your expansion!! I think you are now ready to go for GA. I did some minor copyedits for you... --plange 23:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- sorry, one more thing-- I'm not up to snuff on Canadian English spelling, I only know that it is more like UK than American, but is a mixture. So you might need to go through and make sure Canadian spelling is used. I wasn't sure if they spell program in Canada like they do in the UK - programme, for instance --plange 23:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- I also agree with Yannismarou about influences being under Personal life, doesn't really make sense. And some things in personal life are repeats of info above... --plange 23:27, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
