Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tom Holland/archive1

Tom Holland

 * Nominator(s): FrB.TG (talk) 19:50, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Having recently watched a lot of Marvel films, I chose Holland's article to improve due to my lack of time to undertake a bigger actor's article. At 3.3k words, this is the shortest article I have brought to FAC. That said, it is a comprehensive account of the movies Holland has done so far. Enjoy. FrB.TG (talk) 19:50, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Support - ChrisTheDude

 * "he bagged a supporting part" - "bagged" seems a bit slangy IMO
 * "Holland resides in Kingston upon Thames in South West London" - you already linked Kingston a couple of sentences earlier, also would it not make more sense to clarify at that point that it's in SW London?
 * "In 2017, he told Interview Magazine that he hopes" => "In 2017, he told Interview Magazine that he hoped"
 * "Peter advised Holland" => "Darling advised Holland"
 * "Made on a budget of 45 million" - 45 million what?
 * "he and costars, including Chris Hemsworth lost" - need a comma after Hemsworth to close the clause
 * "Brian Truitt of the USA Today wrote Holland" => "Brian Truitt of the USA Today wrote that Holland"
 * "directors Russo brothers" => "directors the Russo brothers"
 * "through November" - as Holland is British, this article should be written in UK English, and we don't say "through [date]" in the UK.  "Up to and including November" would work.
 * "reunited him with Avengers directors Russo brothers" => "reunited him with Avengers directors the Russo brothers", also no need to link them again
 * "Holland reprised his role as Peter Parker" - no need to link again
 * "In November 2021, Holland told GQ that he is doubtful" => "In November 2021, Holland told GQ that he was doubtful"
 * "In December 2021, Holland confirmed that he is set to" => "In December 2021, Holland confirmed that he was set to"
 * Everything in the first paragraph of the Image section should be in the past tense
 * I am not sure about the past tense here. Public image is usually about general observations made by other people about one's personality and style. Writing these in the past tense without giving a year does not seem correct. I checked similar FA-class articles to see how they do it. Amy Adams, for example, does this ("Hadley Freeman of The Guardian wrote in 2016 ", "The journalist Alex Bilmes believes that"):


 * "He is currently" - better to give a specific "as of" date
 * That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments, Chris. These are the changes I have made in response to them. FrB.TG (talk) 19:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Re the use of the past tense when talking about what someone said about him, my view is that the opinion is as at a point in time so should be framed accordingly. Consider this....if this article is still around in 2080, when Holland is pushing 90, would it be appropriate for it still to say "Jonathan Dean of The Sunday Times [..] takes note (present tense) of his maturity"?  I dunno, maybe let's see what other people think...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, I was wrong. It is in fact correct to use the past tense without having to specify a time. And what you say makes sense as well. I have changed it to the past tense. FrB.TG (talk) 19:26, 9 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:02, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Panini!
You reached out to me by saying you have "another actor article" as if I wouldn't know who Tom Holland was. I'm wrapped up with another article, so I'll be back soon. One quick check-in, however: a reviewer is only allowed to have one FAC open at a time, and Leonardo DiCaprio doesn't appear to be completed yet. Did you get the greenlight to begin this nomination? Panini! • 🥪 19:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 * . FrB.TG (talk) 19:32, 15 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * "Some publications have called him one of the popular actors of his generation." Is a "most" supposed to be here?
 * Considering how you specify "the sequels", you can shorten the second movie titles to Far From Home and No Way Home.
 * Good idea. Done.


 * Life and career
 * The last three sentences of the first paragraph cover similar stuff and gets pretty repetitive, and can be shortened; "Since his parents have creative professions he is often inspired by them; he considered his father a role model, who serves as his unofficial manager due to his experience in the industry."
 * "In 2017, he told Interview Magazine that he hoped to direct films in 20 years because he likes working with actors." This doesn't really apply to his "early life". Could this find a home elsewhere in the article?
 * Definitely not in the No Way Home section. ;) Rearranged.


 * "While his performance was praised, he visited the doctor the following day." The way these two statements are combined makes it sound like he did well because of the tonsilitis.
 * "Bayona then arranged a meeting, and had Holland write a letter to his mother and recite it as an audition" - As in, the mother in the movie or his real life mother? Did he merely read it aloud or use it as a monologue?
 * We have only this info: "..the director pushed Holland to write a heartfelt letter to his mother and then recite it".


 * "The Impossible premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September to critical success.[25] Made on a budget of $45 million, it earned $180.3 million worldwide." -> "The Impossible premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September to critical and commercial success, earning $180.3 million worldwide against a $45 million budget."
 * "Holland received critical praise" - For what specifically? This is a general statement, but only one cites one critic afterward.
 * The source is not a review of his performance but provides general info about the film. It says, "his performance as the strong-willed and determined eldest son is garnering critical acclaim."


 * "and briefly appeared in Billy Elliot the Musical Live" - Was this a cameo? If so, I feel it'd be better to explicitly say so. "Briefly appeared" is vague in comparison.


 * Breakthrough as Spider-Man (aka the second half of career)
 * "he directed a 3-minute short film called Tweet" - Since there's no article on this subject, could you give a brief description on what it is about?
 * "and Peter Travers of Rolling Stone found him 'terrific'." - Simply put, this doesn't add much. If this is all that Travers says about Holland, I don't think it's important enough for inclusion.
 * "he owned 30 costumes and bed sheet covers of the character." What a nerd.
 * I'd prefer a link to the MCU character instead of the comic character for Ant-Man.
 * Similar to my above comment, "having previously won for Captain America: Civil War and Spider-Man: Homecoming" can be shortened to Civil War and Homecoming.
 * "He voiced roles in the Blue Sky Studios animation Spies in Disguise (2019), the live-action film Dolittle (2020), and the Pixar animation Onward (2020)." - Wo-wait-hold on-slow down there! These are three large movies spanned across two years that are breezed over in a sentence. It'd be great to hear his experience with these movies as well as what the critics thought, and although it should e kept short for balancing reasons I bet there's some things to say. I'd also like to note that he did a movie "alongside Avengers co-star Sebastian Stan", but he also did this with Chris Pratt and Robert Downey Jr. with two of the above.
 * I've added about his costars and box-office performances of the films.


 * 'methodical and thoughtful and sensitive', and called him a kind person" - Lots of "and" here.
 * "Chaos Walking failed to recoup its budget and received poor reviews." - Anything critical about Holland?
 * Yes, two things. Added.


 * "No Way Home quickly emerged as the highest-grossing film of 2021" - You link to 2019 in film here.
 * Not sure why I did that. I think it was Dr Strange time-travelling. Corrected.


 * "a fortune hunter and bartender" - I went to see this movie, and I remember the bartender portion being barely relevant to the plot (although I may be forgetting something). Instead, could you one or two words to describe Nathan's personality in the film?
 * I see now that the following sentence needs this bartender piece to make sense. I would say to include the bartender portion in this sentence instead: "Since the character is a bartender, Holland practiced bartending by working shifts at the Chiltern Firehouse, a pub in London."
 * I have left the treasure hunting part. For the bartending bit to make sense, I have tweaked the second sentence to "In preparation for scenes where his character is bartending, Holland practiced the work by working shifts.."


 * I'd link biopic in "Upcoming projects"
 * I like how the "Public image and personal life" section reads; Good Job! However, I think the paragraphs need to be reorganized; paragraphs 1 and 4 are about his public image and 2 and 3 are about his personal life. I'd move paragraph four up to the second paragraphs place to align with the order of the header.

That's all from me! Deal with this and I'll lend a support. Panini! • 🥪 23:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Panini, for your review. It was very helpful as usual. I think I have addressed all of your comments now. Let me know if I missed something. FrB.TG (talk) 11:23, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, shoot, did I never support this nomination? Because I Support this noination. Good work, as usual! Panini!  • 🥪 13:11, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Support
FYI This is a solicited review but I am impartial about it as I know next to nothing about Holland or film actor articles in general. I have already removed two duplicate links. I am a bit wary of promoting such articles only because he potentially has so much future ahead of him that the article will inevitably expand and change significantly, but it appears to be as complete as it can be for this moment in time.
 * I totally understand your concern but I have previously written 10 FAs about actors in their 20s or 30s. One that I wrote was promoted six years ago, and so far I haven't had any problem maintaining any of them. In fact, this is partly why I write such biographies, i.e. they keep me active around here even when I'm not writing something new.


 * I can see that Ref #50 is not archived, check for others to make sure this article remains verifiable.
 * Ref titles are inconsistent, some are in Title Case and others are in Proper Case. Make it consistent.
 * I went for what they're called in the sources. Some refrain from title case so I did exactly that.


 * Ref #60, Box Office Mojo isn't linked, and there are other instances of this throughout. My past experience is that every instance of a website/publisher/work should be linked where an article exists as the first instance might not always be the first instance.
 * AFAIK, there are usually two standards: linking works on their first instances to avoid overlinking (especially in ones that are crowded with references)—this is usually my preference—or link them every time, although I have seen some not linking publishers at all. It makes me think there is no set rule for this.


 * You mention Holland's Instagram in the content, are we allowed to add it under External links?
 * I would upgrade "upcoming projects" to a third tier head, there's no reason for it to be a subset of "2018–present: Blockbuster films and mature roles"
 * I would maybe change "At one point, he considered becoming a primary school teacher, as he likes children." to "At one point, he considered becoming a primary school teacher, as he enjoys being around children"
 * This line "He said she taught him how to properly interact with his fans and thought the media attention to their relationship breached their privacy." Did Zendaya say the attention on their relationship breached their privacy or did Holland?
 * I May be alone on this and I'm willing to hear opinions from yourself and others who may want to weight in such as and, but my knowledge of actor articles suggests there is usually a seprate section to discuss awards/accolades/and reception instead of integrating it into his bio, or as well as integrating it. I can see there is a separate article for these, but I would like opinions on if there should be a subsection summary in this top-level article where that content belongs instead.
 * Reviews of an actor's each works (usually ones from reputable critics/newspapers/magazines that are representative of other reviews) are included in summary style in career section. Such reception section that discusses the themes, acting style and general reception of an actor's works do not always exist, especially in cases of young actors like Holland because they usually end up being WP:UNDUE quotes of excessive praise from costars or directors. And my research showed exactly this: praise from Spider-Man producers or costars about how excellent an actor he is. This can be done in 10 years or so when Holland begins taking on roles of greater substance and such general analysis can be written then (e.g. like how I have written Leonardo DiCaprio).


 * That's all I have for now, it otherwise looks fine. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:07, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, . Some really insightful thoughts. Let me know if I addressed your concerns properly. FrB.TG (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi FrB, did you see the comment about the Instagram? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:01, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, as per WP:INSTAGRAM, such links should only be used when the subject has no official website or little presence in web, which is not the case here. It was there under external links until a few days ago where an editor made the same argument. FrB.TG (talk) 23:21, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright, good luck FrB. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!

Comments from Aoba47
I am leaving this as a placeholder. If I have not posted a review by this time next week, please ping me as a reminder. Aoba47 (talk) 17:17, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking forward. :) FrB.TG (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


 * For File:Tom Holland by Gage Skidmore.jpg, I think it would be beneficial to expand the caption to include where the photo was taken (i.e. 2016 San Diego Comic-Con International).
 * Would it be constructive or beneficial to include Holland's response to Martin Scorsese's comments (i.e. the difference between art films and blockbusters like the MCU films)? I'm not familiar with Holland's work, and I honestly know him more for these comments. That could likely be because Holland comments were recent, but comments like "But [Scorsese] doesn’t know what it’s like because he’s never made one" rubs me the wrong way and it may be helpful to add some of these less than stellar moments from him for balance.
 * Agreed, it suits in the public image section particularly well, where he calls himself "mouthy" for spoiling plot information to the public. I have also added another one where he said his film Uncharted revived Hollywood cinemas and not Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible 7. A little cheeky on Holland's part to be honest. I hope it also addresses your concern of the article not being balanced enough.
 * Thank you for adding both to the article. I was actually unaware of the Tom Cruise remarks. Aoba47 (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)


 * This sentence (Shifting from live audience to camera made the transition from stage to screen challenging for Holland.) reads rather awkwardly to me and I think it would benefit from revision.
 * I do not think the sentence with this quote ("scary environment [...] You can imagine how tiring and brutal that was.") is necessary. The previous sentence already made this quite clear so it feels repetitive to me.
 * The lead says Holland chose to pursue an acting career because of his success with The Impossible, but the article attributes his decision to working with Naomi Watts. I would either be consistent with which is the reason or clarify that it was more than one thing that led to this choice.
 * In the sentences about The Lost City of Z, there is a fair bit of repetition of "film". (i.e. "first film", "last day of filming", "In the film", "making the film"), and it makes the prose feel rather repetitious and not as fully engaging as it could be.
 * There seems to be only quotes for the films he has received positive reviews in. For instance, The Current War does not go into more detail on the negative reviews and even more films like In the Heart of the Sea that had more mixed reviews tilt more positively (although admittedly "adequate" is pretty faint phrase). Just as a note though, I have not fully read the article as this point so I could just be missing it at the moment.
 * I have added a negative review for his performance in The Current War. The problem here is that he played little parts in these films and critics didn't weigh in much when it came to Holland. For ITHOTS, most of the reviews focused on his costars but the ones I did find only talked positively about him ("Holland was one of the youngest actors on set but held his own among his well-known castmates by Collider.com, "Holland is a clear stand-out" by Screen Daily, and Holland is "terrific" by renowned critic Peter Travers. The media seems to love him in whatever he is for some reason.
 * That is understandable. Thank you for your response. Aoba47 (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I think it is notable to mention that Holland performed "Umbrella" in drag for the Lip Sync Battle as that is what makes it notable in my opinion. There's even coverage about how his dad apparently tried to talk him out doing drag for the performance.

My comments go up to the "2018–present: Blockbuster films and mature roles" sub-section. I will attempt to finish my review tonight, but feel free to respond to my comments in the meantime. I hope that my review does not sound too critical of Holland. I am largely indifferent to him, but as I have already said above, I am not a fan of his response to Scorsese (and I am not saying he is always right either lol). Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, Aoba. Some really great points. I thought his response to Scorcese, who is a masterful filmmaker and was only expressing his personal distaste for superhero films, was rather uncalled for, especially when Scorcese made that comment over two years ago and was not taking a cheap shot at someone's work. Note that this is only my reply to how I personally feel about this situation. My reply on how/if this should affect the article will come tomorrow when I’ll attempt to also resolve your other concerns. FrB.TG (talk) 23:21, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the response. I appreciate hearing your perspective about these comments. I am glad that I was not the only one who did not enjoy Holland's responses. I have posted the rest of my review below:

This should be the end of my review. The article is very well-written, and I believe that once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 01:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I have a comment about this part: with Endgame briefly becoming the highest-grossing film of all time. I would avoid this sentence structure (i.e. with X verb-ing). I have been told and seen this note quite a bit in the FAC space. I do not have strong feelings about it, but I just wanted to bring it to your attention.
 * To go off of one of my earlier comments, the "Blockbuster films and mature roles" sub-section does a better job in expanding on more negative or less than positive reviews of Holland's work.
 * For File:Tom Holland MTV 2018 (02).jpg, I would expand the caption to include where the potion was taken (i.e. a MTV interview) to provide further context to readers.
 * Thank you, Aoba, once again. While I am not a Holland fan myself, it was great to see neutral perspectives from you and other reviewers. The balance between praise and criticism of Holland is really much better now. FrB.TG (talk) 10:06, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. I believe that you have addressed all of my comments, but I wanted to double-check with you just to make absolutely sure. If so, then I will be more than happy to support this article for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem. As far as I can see, I adapted all your suggestions unless I stated otherwise. FrB.TG (talk) 16:18, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Image review
 * Suggest adding alt text
 * File:Portrait_of_a_Young_Man,_c._1535-40,_Hans_Holbein_the_Younger.jpg: location link is dead
 * File:Thomas_Nickerson_portrait.jpeg: source link is dead; when/where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 19:33, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, Nikkimaria. I have updated both links (although the one from Nickerson only shows the details) and added alt text. FrB.TG (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Support by Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.


 * Lede
 * Whilst not jargon, there are a couple terms that could be a little difficult, and couple perhaps have a link, choreography, tsunami, superhero. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Tsunami linked. As for the other two, I think choreography is a pretty common term and we generally tend not to link genres (unless they are super specific), especially in a film-related BLP, as they can get messy.


 * Prose
 * Is it not "co-star"? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Replaced with co-star.


 * James gray pipes to a redirect. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Changed, thank you. FrB.TG (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:11, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , just a gentle reminder in case you forgot about this. No worries if you don't have the time for it yet. FrB.TG (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Lee Vilenski ? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Source review (pass)

 * This is not entirely necessary, but I always find it helpful to put citations in numeric order in the prose. So for this part, that Holland was visiting at the time, I would put Citation 9 before Citation 10.
 * This is more of a clarification question, but are you only linking the work/publisher on the first instance? That is a perfectly valid choice, but I just wanted to make sure that this was intentional.
 * Yes, that's right.
 * Thank you for confirming this. Aoba47 (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I would link Zendaya in Citation 5.
 * In Citation 13, I would clarify that this was uploaded to YouTube, which can be done through the via= parameter. If you have other YouTube citations, I would do the same. Citation 16 mentions YouTube, but I think it would be better and clearer to use the via= parameter.
 * Citation 26 should include a note that a subscription is required to access the page as it is an article from The New York Times.
 * For Citation 81, I would avoid having "Exclusive" in all caps even if it is represented like this in the article itself. I would only use all caps for acronyms as it can come across as shouting. The same comment applies to Citation 109.
 * Ranked is still in all caps for Citation 109. Aoba47 (talk) 15:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

These are my comments so far. I will look through some of the citations in the near future to make sure all the information is accurately represented, and I will look through the citations again to make sure I did not miss anything. Aoba47 (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Citation 92 should be Deadline Hollywood and not just Deadline.
 * This is super nitpick-y so apologies in advance, but some of the titles for the Rotten Tomatoes citations include the release year and others do not and it would ideal to be consistent throughout with this.
 * All done, look forward to the next batch. Thank you for the source review as well. FrB.TG (talk) 15:14, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for addressing my comments. I will try to post my next batch of comments by the end of today. Aoba47 (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * For the Roger Ebert citations, I would use the RogerEbert.com link instead since a Wikipedia article exists for the website.
 * Done.


 * I hate to be this person, but how/why is Dominic Holland's website a high-quality source in this context?
 * Dominic is Tom's father and since the things he's talking about is also his own experience (and not just Tom's), it should be fine IMO. FrB.TG (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That makes sense to me. For whatever reason, I did not make the connection between the two. Aoba47 (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Just adding these two quick comments before I run off to work. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC) I have done a spot-check through other citations and everything looks good there. Once my above comments have been addressed, this should pass my source review. I hope that this was helpful! Aoba47 (talk) 02:55, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Citation 11 is being used to support that Holland attended Wimbledon College, but I do not see that supported in the prose or in the video interview.
 * Could you provide a time-stamp for Citation 13? It's a 13:18 video so it would be beneficial to know where the information is being supported. For videos like this, it would be helpful to have a time-stamp if a certain portion of it is being used to support information. Another example is Citation 16.
 * Citation 19 does not support that Holland left Billy Elliot on May 2010.
 * All done, thank you. This was more than helpful. FrB.TG (talk) 07:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for addressing everything. This passes my source review. Aoba47 (talk) 17:20, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the ping but could I get a status update on this, if possible? Thank you. FrB.TG (talk) 11:14, 8 April 2022 (UTC) Gog the Mild (talk) 19:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)