Wikipedia:Peer review/Juliette Binoche/archive1

Juliette Binoche

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it needs input and honing from others to improve it and move it towards featured status. The basic content and scope of the article, I believe is good, but it does require other inputs.

Thanks, Dohanlon (talk) 23:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Canada Hky (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A very detailed article, that looks to be quite good. I think it is a few steps away from FA status, but I believe the basic material is there, and just needs to be molded into the right shape.
Access dates for all the web references, as well as publisher information at a bare minimum. Foreign language refs should have this noted in their cite as well. Citation templates will be helpful here.
Its a very long article. Not excessive by WP:Article size standards, but for an actress whose career will likely continue for a number of years, it is getting right up there.

In this vein, perhaps some of the more trivial information could be removed. A full paragraph about a film in which she only appeared in a few scenes gets the article length right up there.

The material in bulleted lists needs to be incorporated into paragraphs. That also makes the page size seem smaller, so this article is actually probably right in the area of maximum length (6000 - 10 000 words).
Is there a standard for actors / and actresses on Wikipedia after which their filmography is split to a second page?
There is a citation needed tag - that would need to be cleared up before FAC.
Images all look good as far as licensing. For captions - a caption that is not a complete sentence should not have a period at the end.
Check out the toolbox on the peer review page for disambiguation links that need to be fixed, and a check as to the accessibility of your links.

That's all I have for now. Let me know if anything is unclear. I would suggest a copyedit before taking the article to FAC if that is your goal. Canada Hky (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your feedback. It's most useful. I have done a lot of work in bringing this article to its present state and I'm glad to see you feel that the basics are sound. I agree about editing it to reduce length. The part I know least about is formatting the references - you mention templates – do you have a link for those, I can't find it. Once again thatnks for your time – I'll revise it and maybe ask you to have another look soon. Dohanlon (talk) 21:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For citation templates, check out WP:CT, there is a lot of information there to wade through, but it makes things easier. Canada Hky (talk) 01:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]