Wikipedia:Peer review/Ben Affleck/archive2

Ben Affleck

Previous peer review

I'm hoping to submit this article as a FAC in the coming months and would like to prepare it as best I can beforehand.

Thanks, Popeye191 (talk) 07:10, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments

• Careful of the quality of sources - thing like blogs or tabloids are not good choices

@Nikkimaria: Can you give me some examples of the sources you consider to be tabloids?

The Mail. You may want to look at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Catherine_Zeta-Jones/archive1. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, the discussion there is helpful.

*I replaced the Daily Express ref and all but one Fox News ref.

*I didn't replace a Fox News ref that links to an original Affleck interview with Bill O'Reilly.

*Similarly, the Mail ref links to an original Affleck interview, published in the Mail on Sunday.

*In the Zeta-Jones discussion, there was debate about the use of People Magazine as a source. However, it was suggested here that People can generally be considered reliable and I'd argue that I haven't used it to support any contentious claims.Popeye191 (talk) 13:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

*@Nikkimaria:Are there any additional sources that give you pause?Popeye191 (talk) 13:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

On the subject of blogs, I've deleted the Smoking Gun ref. Another blog cited is this one, belonging to journalist Tom Shone, where he posted additional quotes from an interview he conducted with Matt Damon for The Times. Indiewire linked to the blogpost, if that helps?Popeye191 (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

• Periodicals without links should include page numbers. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I no longer have access to EBSCO but have requested a page nubmer for the Biography Magazine ref at the Resource Exchange project. I deleted the second reference from Talk Magazine because I don't have a copy of the magazine and it's not available on an official online database. Popeye191 (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Have now added page numbersPopeye191 (talk) 09:26, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

More comments

Comments to follow, a difficult task to make an article like this not "listy" ("then he did 'x', then he did 'y' "). The article has 44 kb readable prose so there is room for a little expansion. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Make sure if there are two refs at the end of a sentence, the lower-numbered one comes first.

Thanks, fixed these Popeye191 (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

• Actually, I think you've done a good job of avoiding listyness. also, standard of writing is good and article is comprehensive. I'll think on it some more.

Comments by Wehwalt

Short on time right now so sorry for the late entry. So far just the lede. I'll get to the rest of it.

• "He has received accolades including " consider "His accolades include" which not only is shorter and smoother but helps with the fact you have 3 straight sentences starting with "he".

Thanks for taking the time to review it, there's no rush. I've changed it to "his accolades"

• Is it really necessary to have his political party both in infobox AND lede?--Wehwalt (talk) 05:19, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

You're right - I've removed it from infobox Popeye191 (talk) 08:45, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Resuming tardily

• "was a Radcliffe College- and Harvard-educated elementary school teacher." I would say that Radcliffe has been considered part of Harvard at least from the time Ben's mom was likely to have gone to school, and I'd cut "Radcliffe College- and". In any event, get rid of the trailing hyphen!

Removed reference to Radcliffe

• "His parents divorced when he was 12," I might specify Affleck Sr. is being referred to, unless he isn't.

Ben's parents divorced when he was 12. I've asked for some copy editors to help me reword this section to make it less ambiguous.

• Each of the last three sentences of the first paragraph of "Early life" use "he" or "his" to refer to two different people in the same sentence, which is generally disfavored as leading to ambiguity.

Again, hopefully a copy editor will help me with this.

• "He and his brother were surrounded by people who worked in the arts,[20] were regularly taken to the theater by their mother,[21] and were encouraged to make their own home movies.[22] " I imagine that when you say "theater" you mean the stage but the reference to movies later in the paragraph makes this anyone's guess.

Yeah, I meant the stage. I've changed it to theatre perdormances - 'taken to plays' seems too formal. Does it read better now, or what would you suggest?

• You seem to have an affection for "as a" as a phrase that occurs 46 times in the article. I'd try to lower the number of uses and space them out more. Nothing wrong with using it, but the English language is rich in bypasses.
• "saving money for train and airline tickets in a joint bank account" from their acting earnings I assume.

Changed to 'acting earnings'

• "An 18-year-old Affleck then moved" this seems a bit artificial. Maybe "By then aged 18, Affleck moved ..."

Fixed

• I might mention in the paragraph on Good Will Hunting who Affleck's character was and his relationship to Damon's character.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Added some details

Through the end of the acting chronology.

• You may run into some flak at the FAC because the dates for referencing are day month year whereas the article is month day year. That might be a lot of work, and we are not to change the referencing styles lightly per WP:REFVAR. I'm not saying to do anything, merely drawing the matter to your attention.
• I made a small edit hands-on and I may do more of that to save time.

Great, thanks

• "Push, Nevada (2002), created and written by Affleck and Bailey,[82] was an ABC mystery which placed a viewer-participation game within the frame of the show.[83]" The description dances around the fact that this was a weekly show. I might do it by mentioning, say, which night of the week it ws on after "mystery". When you mention it was cancelled, I would mention after seven shows.

I've now made it clear it was a tv series

• "low viewing figures" low ratings.

Changed it

• I notice you use the construction "Also in (year), ..." five times. I would try to cut it to three.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Removed two uses of the phrase

• Congolese activities: I would have a link to the nation of the Congo somewhere in there.

Now linked

• "while leveraging public-private partnerships with companies" huh?

Rephrased

• "Senate Appropriations Committee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Projects" this is a subcommittee

Now listed as Subcommittee

• "He appeared in CinemAbility (2013)," I think you should make it clearer who "He" is.

Fixed

• Five of the first six paragraphs in "Political Views" begin "Affleck ..." It also strikes me that the final paragraph of that (the seventh) is really more relevant to his involvement with the Democratic Party.

You're right. I've moved the paragraph and will work on sentence construction on the other paragraphs soon.

• "Affleck registered as a member of the Democratic Party" I might say "Affleck registered to vote as a Democrat" ... just the nuance of it.

Changed

• It might be appropriate to mention the date of the Affleck/Lopez divorce, if known.

I think you mean the Affleck/Garner divorce? It hasn't been finalised yet but I'll add the date once reported on.

• " Victor Garber, who officiated the ceremony, and his husband Rainer Andreesen were the only guests." I think you need an "at" after "officiated".

Added

It seems well-written and is certainly comprehensive. I think it will do well at FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the detailed feedback, it's been so helpful Popeye191 (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)