Talk:Todd Manning/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Lead

"The role was originated in 1992 by actor Roger Howarth, and is currently being portrayed by actor Trevor St. John."

Explanation, maybe? How can two actors play one character?

"Initially designed to be a ruthless, cunning and one-dimensional villain, throughout the years Todd has evolved into a complex character, often selfish and acting the villain but also passionate about protecting his loved ones and even showing kindness and a conscience."

Seems like personal conjecture to me. Use a reference, at the very least, or remove.

"Todd remarried longtime love Blair Cramer for the fifth time in September 2007. Todd and Blair have two living children, Starr and Jack. "

Just taking a random sentence, this should be rewritten: In Semptember 2007, the writers had Todd remarry Blair Cramer..." and so on. As a general rule, don't have the fictional character doing something actively. Write it so he is passive (i.e. "he was depicted" and the like).

[edit] Character Creation

[edit] Constructing a villain

"Todd Manning was originally intended to be a short-lived role, but notable positive viewer reaction to Howarth's portrayal prompted an expansion of the character, and an increased presence of Todd on the canvas"

What does "on the canvas" mean?

"Michael Malone, the character's creator, discussed fleshing out the villain as being a part of what he loves about soap operas: "the story-telling is a genuine collaboration, not just among writers but by the actors."

Try "said", not "discussed". Also, the quotation doesn't really seem connected to the first part of the sentence.

There is a long quote in this section. Look here: "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea...Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited." So, I think this is violating that law. So can't you just paraphrase?

"In making the character Victoria Lord's younger brother and an heir to the Lord fortune, it was to give the writers quite a large amount of story to work with."

This sentence is not grammatical. Maybe: "Making the character Victoria Lord's younger brother gave the writers quite a large amount of story to work with."

"They "could lead in with the mystery of the false heir (the David Vickers con-man and his corruption of Tina) and then develop Todd not only as Viki's unwanted sibling (what horror for the good Viki to learn that the bad Todd was her blood), but as her professional rival when he uses a splashy tabloid newspaper to wipe out her venerable Banner."

Again, a long quote. It would be better to paraphrase that into a more encyclopediac view.

[edit] Makeup

[edit] Signature scar and the hair

"To make the character seem even more menacing, a nasty-looking scar was given to his right cheek when Marty's friend, Luna Moody, stopped his second physical attack on Marty by whacking him with a crowbar. "

This sentence is somewhat of a run-on, so maybe you could split or add a conjunction. Also, "whacking" is rather informal.

"The camera would often emphasize this villainous scar, that would later become synonymous with the character."

Instead of saying "that would later". try "which later".

"Independent casting director Howard Meltzer explained that "Todd wears the scar like a badge. It’s a warning to others: Don’t mess with me. But Howarth underplays Todd; he doesn’t mug, he doesn’t rant and he gets a lot more from the raising of an eyebrow than raising the volume of his voice. Most of Todd’s performance is reacting to the environment around him, and thanks to Howarth’s expressiveness, viewers can see the wheels turning."[7]

The hair of Todd was just as integral to the character, and was described to be "enigmatic, with an air of innate authority. The hair shows a lack of pretense, as if he just doesn’t care. Overhanging brow seems threatening, but is more designed to conceal the intense, vulnerable eyes underneath. The pouty, sensual mouth confers a charming, boyish quality. But make no mistake: His caution signals aren’t bravado, if crossed, he can be redoubtable."

Long quotes again.

"Photographer Robert Milazzo noted that the hair was the softening part of the character, as portrayed by Howarth; that "you don’t expect that intensity because of it" and that it made Todd more intriguing."

Using "that" isn't really right. I think to avoid having to use it, try paraphrasing. Also, there is a close quotes at the end, but no opening quote.

[edit] References

  • Ref #1- This is not used anywhere in the article
  • Ref #5- You use this 33 (!) times. If this is a book, then you need to quote individual pages, to show where exactly you are quoting from.
  • Ref #6- A personal website is not a reliable source.
  • Ref #8- Same as above

More Comments Coming, but please feel free to address the comments already posted. Noble Story (talk)

[edit] Final GA Review

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

After no response for over a week, I'm going to fail this article. It fails on multiple points, including comprehensiveness, writing out of universe, and prose quality.

If you have a problem, you can go to reassessment. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 14:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)