Talk:Alan Dale: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:47, 13 July 2008

Alan Dale is currently a Theatre, film and drama good article nominee. Nominated by an unspecified nominator at 12:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Australia: Television B‑class Low‑importance

	Australia portal Alan Dale is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Future roles?

What does the subhead "Future Roles" mean? It doesn't seem to make sense as used here. Nomorenonotnever (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alan Dale/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Lead

"The character is the role Dale is most associated with, although he fell out with the producers over the low pay he and the rest of the cast received." The second half is not directly mentioned in the many body of the article.

I was trying to sum up his quotes: "one of the things the company did was to market everything they could out of us and pay us nothing" and "parted on "bad terms"." I thought that was clear enough.

I'm not sure. The main body and the quote doesn't imply "low pay" to me, rather "pay conditions" or "pay deal". Peanut4 (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed "low" so it just states he disputed the payment in general. Better?

Wider success

"Dale only received a couple of auditions" Do you know exactly how many? A couple seems a bit vague.

The source says "a couple", I don't know the exact number.

No worries. Peanut4 (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What profession was Al Patterson in ER? It's probably worth adding to increas the explanation a bit.

I think he was a patient's relative, but I can't find any source to support it.

According to this, I think you're right. I'm not sure it is that important for a source if one can't be found. Though it might be best to wait until you're 100% sure. Peanut4 (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it out.

Personal life

"Since April 8, 1990[18] he has been married to the 1986 Miss Australia, Tracey Pearson, who he met at the 1986 Australian Grand Prix, when she was 21 and he was 39." I know why you've tried to change the tone of this sentence, I'd reword this to something like "On April 8, 1990, he remarried, ... Secondly, does the reference not refer to the entire wedding rather than just the date?
- No, reference 1 refers to everything in that sentence, plus the quote. Reference 18 just refers to the date, which reference 1 does not mention. As for the sentence itself, I don't quite understand what you think needs to be reworded, it makes perfect sense to me.

What the article says isn't wrong. But the way it's written, it emphasises the date rather than him remarrying. It entirely depends what relevance you want to refer to the date and/or the wedding. Peanut4 (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does the fact that he's re-marrying need to be mentioned? If you read the whole section, it becomes clear she is his second wife. I really think the sentence flows better as is, certainly better than any alternatives I can think of. Any suggestions? Gran² 21:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave the final decision up to you. I've been giving a brief thought, and my main suggestion would be to change "since" to "on" and then the most appropriate change of verb/tense. Peanut4 (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise it's spot on. Really good work. I'll place it on hold until those points have been either addressed. I've also had to correct a couple of typos - I'd suggest just giving the article a read through next time you have a GAN or FAC, I'm as guilty of it too, but it helps out the reviewer. Peanut4 (talk) 22:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. Gran² 07:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final review

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

An excellent article. Top work. The main thing to do to improve it would be find some free use images. All the best with improving it further. Peanut4 (talk) 22:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Gran² 22:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 12:04, 29 June 2008 edit Gran2 (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 26,809 edits GAN ← Previous edit		Revision as of 21:47, 13 July 2008 edit undo Peanut4 (talk \| contribs) Rollbackers 28,347 edits →Future roles?: transclude GA review Next edit →
Line 6:		Line 6:

	What does the subhead "Future Roles" mean? It doesn't seem to make sense as used here. [[User:Nomorenonotnever\|Nomorenonotnever]] ([[User talk:Nomorenonotnever\|talk]]) 00:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)		What does the subhead "Future Roles" mean? It doesn't seem to make sense as used here. [[User:Nomorenonotnever\|Nomorenonotnever]] ([[User talk:Nomorenonotnever\|talk]]) 00:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

			{{Talk:Alan Dale/GA1}}