Wikipedia:Peer review/Pierce Brosnan/archive1

Pierce Brosnan
This peer review discussion has been closed. Faied FA only due to prose. Ultra! 14:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 02:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comment: I read the FAC and the comments all say that this needs a copyedit. I have scanned the article and agree. Have you asked for help with a copy edit? Try asking someone from WP:PRV or WP:LOCE for help. Once the article is as polished as you can get it, I would then go back to the FAC reviewers and politely ask them to look at the article again.

Frankly I am not sure what else Peer Review can provide you - the problem is clear, get a very thorough copyedit. I hope this helps, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

SGGH

I suggest:
 * Wikilink the other films in the lead?
 * Wikilink "US" in the lead
 * "born to a carpenter Thomas" doesn't really flow well enough.
 * "abandoned the family" is pov, we have no idea why he left unless it says so in a third party RS
 * Some of the paragraphs are short and could be merged
 * "A fire eater was teaching women how to put the flames across the chest and they had their tops off. So he thought he'd join in and learnt how to fire-eat" the first sentence seems slightly convoluted, as if the author was afraid of saying breasts, and the second sentence is a bit casual in tone, and there is a typo.
 * "the ruggedly handsome title role in the NBC romantic detective series Remington Steele" er.... is that a third party statement or the authors opinion?
 * "that Brosnan was going to inherit another role of Moore's" you havent mentioned Roger Moore before, so full name/wikilink him. [I assume you mean him?]
 * "legal squabbles" squabbles?
 * Again, some of these paragraphs could be merged.
 * I very much doubt one new sunday times article is notable enough to be in the further reading, I don't think this section is needed.

Hope these points help you! SGGH speak! 15:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)