Wikipedia:Peer review/Julian Eltinge/archive1

Julian Eltinge
This was the first article I wrote for Wikipedia when I first got on last year. I've just rewritten most of it and expanded the information as well as adding links and references. I'm considering nominating this for FA, but having spent time on the FAC board, I know they are sharks. What should be improved? Thanks! Ganymead 07:05, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Great article – it looks like you've done your research. I a little concerned about a couple things, namely, slightly POV language ("he gracefully broke through the strictures" in the lead) and rather short paragraphs.  Preferably the 2-3 line paragraphs should be lengthened, because this article is on the short side, but if it's comprehensive (I wouldn't know, since I've never heard of the guy), then probably they should just be joined.  From the external link that you say is "incredible" (that should probably be changed to "comprehensive" or something along those lines), there is a biography section that talks about his life alot more.  It looks like there is alot of discrepancy over what really happened when he was young – why not talk about that more?  And it has alot more about his career as well; could more of that be incorporated?  What about the other sources?  Is there more to say?  Right now, the article is not anywhere close to being too long, so make sure it's comprehensive.  Oh, one more thing – some of the red links (especially the ones linking to people and the theater named after him) should probably be linked to stubs; that is, it might be good to create articles like Eltinge Theater and Bert Savoy.  --Spangineer &#8734; 13:39, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ganymead, I see many excellent points have already been made by Spangineer. Here are a few more to be going on with, on the path to WP:FAC:
 * The lead section is too short. It needs to summarize the article (not the subject, but the article) in a comprehensive way, see Lead section. The 2nd sentence seems to have had a copyedit accident, it's syntactically screwed-up.
 * Very nice pic, but it needs more information on copyright and provenance on the image description page. I know it wasn't you that uploaded it, but you're still the one that'll get blamed on FAC :-/. Perhaps you know how old it is and where it comes from? I fixed the broken PD template myself, but a less general tag would be better, or.
 * I would say you quite urgently need more pics, also. Checking...wow, the internet has a wealth of 'em! Why ever haven't you filled your article with these babies? For instance from this photo gallery, that you've got listed under External links: http://silentgents.com/PEltinge.html.
 * You might want to think about using an ordinary portrait at the top, something like http://silentgents.com/Eltinge/Eltinge03.jpg. Sure, the one you've got is more interesting visually, but it might be considered more professional and encyclopedic to show just a regular head portrait at that point. (The "What would the Encyclopedia Britannica do?" principle.)
 * For the whole image copyright nightmare :-(, please see Image copyright tags, which either has or links to everything you need to know about it, and, basically, start praying that the pics you want to use are demonstrably pre-1923. Maybe the books you list have illustrations with years for some of the relevant images? That would be a big help. Writing to the user who uploaded the image you're using now, (Nunh-huh) and seeing what he knows about provenance and age might be another in.
 * The reference section looks good, but I'd say you need a bit more attribution in the text, to connect the claims made and the appropriate reference. E. g., "some scholars" is a weasel word, say which scholars think the circumstances of Eltinge's death mysterious (one scholar will do fine). I absolutely don't mean for you to distract the reader with footnotes (yech): just mention the person in a way that makes it clear which reference is being invoked. Say where Dorothy Parker wrote the passage you quote, etc.
 * The text is well written, but my sense is that a bit of a copyedit for occasional syntax trouble wouldn't hurt (I'll do it if you like). Thanks for writing a cool article! Bischånen|Tåk 15:15, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I've re-written the introduction and I've filled in a few of the red links. The other tasks are coming along and now having a copy of Eltinge's New York Times obit., I can clear up some facts. Thanks for the wonderful suggestions! They have and will help immensely! Ganymead 02:46, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)