Wikipedia:Peer review/Ethan Hawke/archive1

Ethan Hawke

 * 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 April 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 April 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) 14:29, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm taking pity on this article - it hasn't received a peer review for four days, so here I go making my first peer review comment. Well if you want to eventually push the article to FA status, then you need more then the basics. After reading the article, I noticed there is only the basic information (early life, career, personal life, filmography and bibliography). Try reading the featured article criteria and you'd get what I mean. In order for an article to actually be featured, it has to be notable - don't get me wrong, this is a great article. It has to have some significance, you know? Has Hawke ever done some philanthropy? What's the public image of him? Try finding something more than just the average page about his career. Hopefully this advice is useful - again, it's my first time giving a peer review. Great work on the article so far though. -- A talk / contribs 17:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This seems excellent to me. It's well-written, well-sourced, and appears to be comprehensive. I have a few suggestions about prose issues and one suggestion about the image variety (or lack thereof). Nice job.

1994–1998
 * "The Hottest State mostly received negative reviews, with Entertainment Weekly noting, "Ethan Hawke ... opens himself to rough literary scrutiny in The Hottest State... ". - The "with plus -ing" construction is deprecated. I'd suggest re-casting as something like: "However, the book received mostly negative reviews. Entertainment Weekly said, "Ethan Hawke ... opens himself to rough literary scrutiny in The Hottest State...".
 * Done.
 * "his highest budgeted movie to date" - "Highest budgeted" seems a bit strained. Would "most expensive" be better?
 * Not really, it would sound like POV.
 * "Also in 1998, he appeared in Great Expectations, the contemporary film adaptation of the Charles Dickens novel of the same name. - I try to avoid link bumps like the last two in this sentence because a reader can't tell at a glance what's being linked. One simple solution would be to link this way: "novel of the same name", although either construction might be called an Easter egg link because a reader still can't tell for sure at a glance where the link might go. It might be better to simply repeat the title, thus: "novel, Great Expectations". The same argument could be made about White Fang in the "Early work" section and Snow Falling on Cedars in the "1999–2002" section. Ditto for Hamlet. Ditto Assault on Precinct 13. Another solution might be to vary the prose from case to case instead of repeating "of the same name" in every case and not to bother linking to the originals in every case since the authors are all linked. Just a suggestion.
 * Done.

1999–2002
 * "a film that follows two Los Angeles Police Department narcotics detectives" - Here's another link bump. This would be easy to fix thus: "a film that follows two narcotics detectives from the Los Angeles Police Department".
 * Done.
 * "PopMatters also complimented Hawke's writing style, adding: "Hawke’s writing style is enjoyably easy." - Re-cast to avoid repeating "writing style"?
 * Done.

Stage career
 * "a Manhattan theater company that is now defunct" - "Now" is a vague word corresponding to no particular time. It would be better to say when it became defunct if you can find a source.
 * This was brought up in the GA review, and like I stated there I'm gonna state here, there's no source that says when the theater became defunct, only that its defunct.
 * "for artist-driven Off-Broadway company The New Group" - Missing word? Should it read "for the artist-driven"?
 * I'm not sure on that one. But, I've added "the" to the sentence.
 * "Whenever the economy gets hit hard, one of the first thing to go is... " - Either the quote contains a typo, or the quote was incorrectly transcribed. It should say "things" rather than "thing".
 * No, the quote is correct.
 * "In review of the play, the New York Daily News enjoyed his performance, writing... " - Slightly illogical since the News enjoyed his performance during the play rather than during the review. One solution would be to delete "enjoyed his performance" and just say. "In review of the play, the New York Daily News said... ".
 * Done.

Images
 * The images look good, and the licenses look good to me. The layout is fine. The only thing that jars a bit is that all the photos are mug shots of Hawke. If possible, it might be nice to break this up with something else, a mug shot of Uma Thurman, for example, or a photo of one of the theaters he performed in. Just a suggestion.
 * I think you mean adding an image of Hawke and Thurman. Adding an image of just Thurman would seem strange.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 20:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Further Finetooth comment: I should add that I have no doubts about notability here. WP:GNG says in part, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Finetooth (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to help out with the peer review process, it is most appreciated. :) I would also like to say that I've gotten your concerns, hopefully, there's a step closer to nominating Hawke's article to FAC. -- ThinkBlue   (Hit   BLUE)  21:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)