Wikipedia:Peer review/Daniel Day-Lewis/archive1

Daniel Day-Lewis

I have been working on this page for the last few days (week?) now in order to get it ready for featured article status, I am requesting a peer review in the hopes that the comments will allow me to fix what problems I do not see at this moment before I submit it for featured article candidacy. The Filmaker 00:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

• One thing first off, according to what should not be linked, years without full dates should not be linked, like 1984.AndyZ 00:18, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Done and done, funny, I was thinking the exact opposite. The Filmaker 00:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

• Couple points
  • I see at least two movie titles not italicized.
  • The second paragraph of the lead ought to be cited, and the lead needs some work -- it should be a summary of the rest of the article, and could be expanded by a paragraph.
  • Why refer to him as "Daniel"? It's most normal to use the last name.
  • "Living in Greenwich, he naturally found himself among some tough South London kids. Being Irish, Jewish and posh, he was often bullied by local children his age" -- perhaps if I was British, I'd understand it. What does "posh" mean in this context?
  • "While his disdain grew" -- it took me a minute to realize what "disdain" referred to. Make this more clear?
  • The paragraph beginning "His acting continued along with his unruly behavior" needs some work. Is there another source you can use to confirm this? The wording makes it look like we're trying not to reveal the name of the painkiller. The first sentence is just badly-worded. Which authorities locked him? (People in the community at large aren't generally institutionalized just for hallucinating, at least in the US -- was he brought to a hospital for some reason) Is locking people in a room with a nurse to detox normal in the UK? I work in mental health in the US and that seems odd to me (why waste a nurse for hours to watch somebody detoxing in a locked room?). The last sentence I have a problem with because the paragraph implies that he was locked up from hallucinating from the painkillers, and then acted sane to be released -- presumably this means after the painkillers and hallucinations wore off, so why would he have needed to act sane? Anyway, this paragraph's problems might not be solveable based on available sources, but I wanted to bring it to your attention.
  • "Eleven years after his film debut" -- seems odd to say that he started his "serious" film career with a bit part
  • Did he really break two ribs from being hunched over? That seems doubtful for a frail elderly person, much less a presumably healthy young man.
  • Why was he "forced" to take antibiotics? My first interpretation was that he refused because it wasn't in character, but my guess is that he was "forced" because the pneumonia got worse. Is that right? I think antibiotics are generally prescribed for any pneumonia, regardless of the severity, so I'm not sure about that.
• Just a couple things I wanted to point out, Tuf-Kat 05:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
• I've fixed most of the points you've made:
  • I fixed the movie titles.
  • Expanded and cited the second paragraph.
  • Changed all of the "Daniel's" to "Day-Lewis'".
  • I am not from the UK, but I did look up the word "posh" which means fashionable, stylish, among other things. I thought about changing it, but I decided against it since it did embody what needed to be said, and still, it is a word.
  • I've made the "disdain" quote more clear.
  • As for the "painkillers" paragraph. This paragraph was probably the biggest issue, wasn't it? It's actually a more or less copy from the Tiscali UK Bio (which I cited). So this is all of the information I have. I do not know who arrested him or what painkillers were used. I have however modified the paragraph slightly and given it two more citations for the purposes of clarity, i.e. "locked with a nurse" to "nurse supervision" as well as "sane man" to "sane and sober man". I believe that the authorities that he was an addict. And he later had to convince him that he was not insane (as a lot of drug users are) in addition to not being an addict.
  • By "he would enter the film business seriously in a bit part" meaning that he was entering the film industry with serious intention as opposed to his role in Sunday, Bloody Sunday which was simply out of leisure.
  • I'm also somewhat fuzzy on him breaking two ribs in the course of filming My Left Foot. I haven't had the opportunity to see the new DVD that has recently been released. But the information is from the film's IMDB trivia page (which I almost cited), but since the site is referencing the actual DVD's documentary, I think it's worthy of being considered more than speculation or rumor.
  • Yes, he was forced take antibiotics because he would not break character and refused to take them. I've made that more clear.

Hopefully I've cleared it up as best I can.The Filmaker 00:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding "posh" - I have wikified the reference in the article, which I hope counters the criticism of its use. The posh article itself could do with some work, however, as it struggles to properly capture the (British) sense in which it is used here. --Estarriol ^talk 15:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)