Wikipedia:Peer review/István Szabó/archive1

István Szabó

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 it's my first article on Wikipedia. I'm looking for general feedback/assessment. I've completely rewritten the article to add detail and depth, improve structure, improve style, increase the impartiality of the section on Szabó’s informant activities, add and improve references, add images, and reformat and expand the filmography. How would you rate it? What would it need to atttain Featured Article status? Thanks, Hirschjoshua (talk) 04:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: This looks very creditable for a first article. I have not had time to look closely at the prose, but I have identified some issues that require attention if the article is to move towards Good Article standard. I would not advise you to think in Featured Article terms just yet (the FA criteria are very demanding), though this can clearly be a target for the future:-

The lead should be expanded into a summary of the whole article. Perhaps look at WP:LEAD for guidance
A much more extensive level of citation is required throughout the article. As a rough rule of thumb, every paragraph should have at least one citation, and every paragraph should end with a citation.
The list of "References" does not indicate how these most of these sources have been used in the preparation of the article. Many of them may be better described as "Further reading", if they have not been used specifically in the creation of the text. If they have they should be cited.
The style of your citations and references is somewhat rudimentary. You should study Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example style for instruction on the proper ways in which these should be formatted
You should also familiarise yourself with the WP:Manual of Style. For example, n-dashes, not hyphens should be used in date or page ranges. Thus "1981–1988", not 1981-1988; "116–117" not 116-117, etc
Another MoS issue relates to the use of capitals in section titles, which except for proper names is limited to the first word. Thus "Hungarian films" not "Hungarian Films"; "International co-productions featuring Brandauer"; "1991–present", etc
Who is "Brandauer"? He is introduced into the text without explanation; I assume he is an actor, but he needs proper introduction and identification.
How does Image:Sunshine_1999_film_Adam_Sors.jpg‎ "illustrate the article's description of a Hungarian family experiencing anti-Semitism" (your fair use rationale)? In fact, where does this description occur in the article?
Likewise with File:Mephisto Brandauer Makeup.jpg, the fair use claim that this image "illustrates the article's discussion of the themes of theater, role playing, and identity" is not apparent in the article. How are you claiming that the image does this?

My advice is that you should attend to these issues initially. When you have done so I will be happy to look at the prose if you contact my talkpage. Brianboulton (talk) 16:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Brian! I appreciate your time, and will attend to your suggestions.Hirschjoshua (talk) 04:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]