Wikipedia:Peer review/David Schwimmer/archive1

David Schwimmer

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I would like to have suggestions be made for the article to try and aim the article to Feature article status. Any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks, -- ThinkBlue   (Hit   BLUE)  17:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment – The awards section needs to be referenced with reliable sources, and it would be nice if it was turned into a table, like this or this.  The Le ft ori um  19:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Added table. -- ThinkBlue   (Hit   BLUE)  21:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Otherwise a solid read and a lot of potential! Madcoverboy (talk) 19:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Some unencyclopedic tone in the lead: "several years later" is unspecific; "For much of the late-1980s, he lived in Los Angeles as a struggling, unemployed actor." isn't particularly notable; "landed the role"
 * I removed "landed the role".
 * "Schwimmer moved to Chicago to attend Northwestern University", technically Northwestern's theater program is in Evanston
 * "After graduating in 1988, with a Bachelor of Arts degree in theater and speech, Schwimmer co-founded the Lookingglass Theatre Company.[3] After graduating, he returned to Los Angeles to pursue an acting career." Which is it: he founded Lookingglass in Chicago or moved to Los Angeles after graduating?
 * He co-founded the theatre in Chicago and moved to LA after graduating from Northwestern.
 * More specific details about roles in Early work?
 * I'll try to work on this.
 * "The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette was complimentary of Schwimmer, calling him "terrific"." Is there a reason to privilege this one review over others besides the fact it's really positive?
 * I added another review.
 * The quoted review in Break-through seem to go on too long as to become tangential
 * Do you have a suggestion on how to "break" them down?
 * "He later described the directing experience as "intellectually engaged"." Unclear what this means or why it's important
 * I removed this.
 * Friends and after reads like a prosified laundry list of reviews and quotes rather than a cohesive narrative.
 * Suggestion?
 * The awards and nominations should merit more mention in the prose than in a list at the end.