Talk:David Proud/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Majorly talk 13:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Majorly and I'll be reviewing this article.

It's looking fine so far, but it needs work before it can be made a Good Article.

Some points:

Never cite to IMDB. It's not reliable.
The lead needs expansion per WP:LEAD.
What are grade Ds? I've added a tag by this.
"studied theatre studies" sounds a little odd. Why not "studied theatre"?
"has been described by Proud as "one of [his] proudest achievements"." - This needs a citation, as it's a quote.
"the 2007 CBBC drama series Desperados, a children's drama" There's too much repetition of children's and drama.
No infobox? No picture?
The external links should ideally lead to profiles, not to the news sections. TV.com could be added too.
Why are several of the links webcitations? (This is a good idea actually, I might consider doing it!)
The text "geeky Scott (Proud) puts his energy into a behind-the-scenes documentary" almost matches "Scott, a geeky paraplegic who puts his energy into making a behind-the-scenes documentary" from the source. Was this taken from the Wikipedia article, or vice versa?
"When not acting, Proud is studying for a degree in psychology with the Open University" is very similar to the source "When not acting I am studying for a psychology degree at the Open University".
"David has secured a mainstream agent" similar to "I secured a mainstream agent".

Once these points have been fixed, I'll check through the relevant criteria. Majorly talk 16:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I ought to make it clear that on the whole I didn't write this article, but it was in a bit of a poor state when I found it, so I've mostly been adding sources, removing unverified claims and filling in a couple of gaps. Proud is not a well-known actor yet and so the number of available online sources on him is small. At the time I submitted this for GAN, I believe every single reliable source available has been used and cited, bar a couple that were essentially duplicates (the EastEnders press release was apparently picked up by every UK newspaper but none added anything substantive to it) and this Guardian article which is largely redundant to the View London source. Once he becomes more famous, I expect that more sources will become available. The original writer of the article appears to know Proud personally, and included facts that I'm almost certain are correct, but couldn't find a source for (or was only able to verify from Proud's CV, which no longer seems to be publicly available). Point by point:

IMDB may or may not constitute a reliable source, depending on what is being quoted. Have a look at the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Citing IMDb where there was no consensus on the blanket rule of "never reliable". Some information is sent in by readers, others by agents or film-makers, and the vetting process seems to depend on what kind of information it is (plot summaries receive a different treatment to casting details, for instance). In this case it seems "reliable enough" - the basic biographical details given on IMDB seemed to match those given by Proud's agent on the old CV, and other sources seem consistent with the year and location of birth. Since that's the kind of detail that is added to IMDB (at least for new, living actor) by their agents, the fact they tallied is no great surprise. Of course, what the agent says may not necessarily be the truth, but unless somebody fishes out his birth certificate, no other source will be more reliable. I would rather not have quoted from IMDB, but since Proud doesn't have a personal website, no other available sources stated the precise date, and the IMDB details were almost certainly added by his agent anyway, I'm happy to settle on IMDB for now. There is no evidence to suggest IMDB is wrong in this case. IMDB is essentially accurate on filmographies (with rare exceptions: unknown actors sharing the same name for instance). There are plenty of non-reliable sources that corroborate the fact that he did indeed play the given role in Secret Diary of a Call Girl (including his professional show-reel, it's also listed on tv.com but I believe IMDB is more reliable, and an interview that incorrectly lists it as a BBC project). The film Hunger House seems to have attracted no critical attention, but again, other sources corroborate that Proud had a the Ernst role in it, including a copy of his CV here. Since the IMDB uses official credits, and is clearly correct in this case, I believe it is a satisfactory source for this purpose.

Thing is, we don't know who wrote this information. It could be an agent, or it could be a fan. The fact we don't know makes it difficult to verify its authenticity. There must be other places this information could be obtained. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the lead somewhat. WP:LEAD suggests that an article with <15,000 characters should have 1 or 2 paragraphs of lead. This article has <4,000 characters so the lead certainly shouldn't be very long. I'm afraid that expanding the lead, I've now made the article unnecessarily repetitive.

This is ok now. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be inappropriate to explain what a grade D at A level means in this article, but I've included a section link that should help. I had previously assumed that since the grading structure of A levels was included in the linked article about them, that would suffice for the curious reader. Does what I have now done constitute overlinking? (The same article is linked twice within a couple of words, although one of those is a section link.)

Fine for me; others might not like it though. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The quote "has been described by Proud as "one of [his] proudest achievements" already was cited (as is the following quotation) to ref 2. I added another ref marker to make this clearer, though.

Thanks. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed some repetition.

OK. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, no infobox, no picture. Putting it mildly, this is not a well-known actor (although this may change over the next few months) - there are hardly any non-free images available, let alone free ones. I also feel that when an article (and therefore lead) is so short, there is no benefit from adding an infobox as the lead summarizes everything concisely already. Metadata is already handled via WP:PERSONDATA. If you can give me one big advantage of including an infobox I'll happily add one.

Not really, just wondered. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The IMDB profile has already been linked in the citation (this is subject to change of course) so I felt adding a news link might not be a bad idea (the main advantage is it makes it easy for a reader to see if the article has got out of date). Perhaps both the profile and news pages can be linked. Digitalspy doesn't have a profile page on Proud, only a news clippings compilation. TV.com has a profile page, but it's awful [1]. (It lists Proud's gender as female!)

TV.com is a no-no then. You might have a point wrt IMDB. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've used WebCite because I don't have much faith that all the sources will continue to be archived at their current addresses. It would not surprise me if View London ceased to exist altogether within the next few years.

My experience is, at least with BBC news articles, they are kept online and stable. But, better to be safe than sorry. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Similarities between article and sources are indications of the article following the sources a little too closely. I have attempted to break these up.

Thanks. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% convinced this is ready for GA just yet, but it's certainly looking better than when I found it. TheGrappler (talk) 21:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to the GA criteria:

1a) I think it meets this. Instances of minor issues were fixed by myself and above. 1b) Meets this. 2a) Meets this. 2b) Not sure on this one. Until there's a better source than IMDB, I'm not happy with the refs. 2c) Everything is covered by refs. 3a and b) Meets these. 4) Meets this. 5) Seems to meet this. At a later date though, if he becomes more famous, the situation might need reviewing. 6) There are no images, but as he is relatively unknown, this is understandable.

So until the references are found, I cannot make this a GA. Which would be a shame. Majorly talk 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Can I check we agree which aspects of the article need better sourcing, so that I know exactly what I'm looking for? I think it boils down to:

One-off role in ITV drama Secret Diary of a Call Girl. (Definitely true: it's in his show-reel and an old CV listed on the BBC site, more details are fleshed out in various unreliable sources. Could theoretically be sourced to the interview with Disability Now, but the reporter mistakenly refers to it as a BBC drama so I'd rather not.)
Role as Ernst in independent short Hunger House (Definitely true: it's on the old CV listed on the BBC site. But that film seems only to have been shown at a few festivals and I can find no full reviews of it, even in non-professional sources, and IMDB seems the most reliable of the various sites that report the casting, the rest I could find being genre-specific fansites. The film certainly exists, with various references to it appearing even in the reliable sources listed in the article, but only in the context of Justin Edgar and 104 Films. As a short film that did not attract critical attention, an alternative is to remove mention of Hunger House on the grounds of lack of significant coverage. For comparison: the BBC CV mentions Proud's theatre roles at the Birmingham Rep, but the productions seem to have have evaded critical attention, with the Birmingham Post apparently reviewing neither The Mothership nor Lemon Drops. A site search gives the The Post's only mention of either as a passing mention of the "recent small-scale community touring show, The Mothership", while the British Theatre Guide describes Lemon Drops as a short performed in the play theatre's studio space, The Door. Quite rightly the article only mentions Proud's film and TV work and ignores the theatrical work, which seems "non-significant" and lacks sources. Hunger House is a short film not a feature, with no widespread release or professional critical reviews, so perhaps can also be ignored. It does, however, help illustrate Proud's close links to Justin Edgar, Jason Maza, and British independent film, which have been an important feature of his early career.)
Proud's date of birth. Location of birth (Cambridgeshire) could be cited to e.g. the Disability Now interview if required, but the DOB can't be traced to anywhere but IMDB. The DOB given is completely consistent with ages stated in all other sources (the issue of Proud's age is frequently raised since he tends to play characters younger than himself). The BBC CV unfortunately lists the ages he could be cast as rather than his DOB. I'm fairly sure that his actual DOB was given in the (no longer publicly available) CV his agent posted.

The biggest problem is that IMDB is a user-supported (albeit not user-generated) site, so there is controversy over whether it (or which aspects of it) are reliable. Casting details for David Proud, as for any other currently active actor, will have been submitted by the film and TV production staff, which is why they are generally reliable (with the biggest problem being people with identical names being mixed up, or entered under two distinct names; neither of these are a problem here). The discussion at WT:Citing IMDb reveals that IMDB does have an editorial team that correct reported errors and also vet new submissions of user-generated materials, even in the "fluffier" sections like goofs, quotes or plot summaries, with evidence required to support submitted claims (although the discussion suggests that this was applied more liberally in the past). It seems quite implausible that the date of birth information will have been submitted by anybody other than Proud's agent, particularly since a casting file photo has also been submitted, and Proud was a virtual unknown until the EastEnders role was announced (and the DOB info preceded that). I wonder if it is worth consulting User:MichaelQSchmidt - who works in the industry and uses IMDB professionally - to check what level of vetting date of birth information is likely to have on IMDB (WT:Citing IMDb mostly focussed on their film rather than biographical entries, but did note that the wordy sections of actor biographies tend to be user-submitted; Proud doesn't have such a biography there).

Obviously in an ideal world, it would be better to avoid IMDB by citing alternative sources (as is the norm in all FAs of film actors), but few exist for Proud, who had at best fringe notability before the EastEnders role. I doubt there are any more reliable sources that I can dredge up. Below are some possible strategies.

For the filmography: note that the facts from the filmography are non-controversial and clearly correct. Unfortunately various sources, such as Proud's professional showreel and forum or blog coverage of his roles, corroborate the facts without being reliable sources for Wikipedia purposes. Options:

Accept the citation of IMDB alone.
Cite the BBC CV in addition to IMDB (for whether the CV counts as a reliable source: the CV is part of the BBC's directory of disabled performers, which was launched with some fanfare and actually drew significant press attention itself)
Cite the BBC CV alone, and drop the IMDB citation (this would mean dropping the fact that Hunger House is a holocaust drama unless it was cited to a source such as this one)
Cite neither the BBC CV nor IMDB. Keep only the feature film, which is strongly referenced already. Drop all mention of the short, Hunger House. It may be necessary to drop mention of the TV appearance in Secret Diary of a Call Girl; this could alternatively be cited to TV.com - probably less reliable than IMDB - or the Disability Now interview that mistakenly calls it a BBC drama.

I think if it means removing citing IMDB, it's the best option. I'd go with option 3. Majorly talk 13:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the date of birth: note that the exact date of birth is certainly only available from IMDB (or clones thereof). However, it is consistent with ages given in other sources, and is almost certainly the DOB supplied by his agent. Options:

Accept the citation of IMDB alone and keep the full date. (I'm not entirely happy with this option, for breach of privacy as much as impossibility of cross-referencing)
Accept the citation of IMDB but cut the DOB down to the year 1983. (Averts privacy concerns; also, while the exact DOB can't be easily cross-referenced - there'd be no way of telling if it was a slightly different date in 1983 - there are strong grounds for taking the year of birth to be correct.)
Don't accept the IMDB source. Take one deemed-reliable source that includes Proud's age at a specified time, and work backwards to find the two possible years of birth consistent with it. List his DOB as "1982 or 1983". I've seen this done in a few articles before, but it's messy.
Don't accept the IMDB source. Don't list a DOB at all. Perhaps give his age "as of" a specified date (using a deemed-reliable source and publication date) e.g. using the DigitalSpy source, Proud was 26 years old as of June 2009. Less uncertainty than giving two possible years of birth (that calculation being left up to the article's readers), but looks a bit odd, especially as the article ages.

If there is no source other than IMDB, it might be best to drop the reference to IMDB but leave the fact there anyway. It shouldn't be a problem. Majorly talk 13:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There would be a certain irony to using a press source to establish Proud's age or date of birth, since ages given in the press are notoriously unreliable! How do those options look to you? TheGrappler (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Clarification: I think that the date of birth information counts as part of a "resume" on IMDb and therefore the restrictions on who was allowed to add it are here - "You may submit a resume and photos for yourself or an authorized representative may submit them on your behalf". I think that assuming random fans can submit dates of birth and photos for actors is a misunderstanding of the way IMDb works, the big problem with IMDb as a source is that some submissions of information there are clearly not so tightly restricted as others! TheGrappler (talk) 19:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I have found another source that may back up the birthdate, from a site that doesn't seem to accept user contributions. But on the other hand, I'm suspicious (though not certain) that it has just imported the information from IMDb anyway, in which case there might not great virtue in swapping sources (best to get it from the original source, and the that is clearly being monitored by the actor's agent). I'm going to investigate whether MTEDb might be regarded as more reliable than IMDb. I'm going to need a little time to get some feedback on this, the site owners are apparently open to being contacted. I'll feedback here when I get some answers. TheGrappler (talk) 22:34, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any update? Majorly talk 14:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been nearly two months; either pass or fail depending on where it is now, since no updates have been made to the article. Wizardman 15:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, due to inactivity, I have no choice but to fail this. Majorly talk 22:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]