Wikipedia:Peer review/Audrey Hepburn/archive2

Audrey Hepburn[edit]

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. Although it has had a peer review in the past, this page has gone through radical changes in the last few months since it has been reviewed. There is a substantial amount of information that needs to be looked through and seeing as Audrey Hepburn is, you know, just a bit of a legend, I think it's vital that her Wikipedia article is one of the best around! Thanks, Stephenjamesx (talk) 21:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lobo512 comments: Hi Stephen. I've noticed the work you've been doing on Audrey's page, and I think it's great that you are trying to improve it. Since this is well within my area of interest, I'm going to offer some comments.

The main thing that was said in both the last peer review and the (tellingly brief) GA review was that the article is lacking citations. You have improved this, but I still think it is under-cited. The whole "Final entertainment-related projects" section doesn't have a single one. And crucially, those sources that are used are pretty weak. Under the "Further reading" section there is a lovely list of of Audrey biographies that would be perfect for the article, but they are barely referenced at all. When there are so many books available about the subject, it is inexcusable to be relying solely on newspaper articles (to my mind). If you are serious about improving the article, I think you should buy a couple of these books (Amazon sells them dead cheap) and go through the article adding copious references to them (ideally, everything in the article should be verifiable). Using high quality sources like these will improve the page IMMENSELY. People won't be able to argue with it.

A few comments:

"Although modest about her acting ability..." < I'm not a fan of this. It doesn't really add anything, I don't see the point of it.
Be careful not to use WP:Peacock words. Even if they are accurate, wiki doesn't like them. Just try and tone down the praise, basically. The article is very laudatory right now.
Also remove any journalistic comments, like "Peck was correct." Always keep in mind that this is meant to be an encyclopedic entry and keep the tone appropriate to that. We're not really meant to evoke any emotion, keep it very matter of fact (boring right?!)
Words like "notwithstanding" and "unbeknownst" are rather ugly.
Can we have some more detail about her appearance in Gigi? It was such an important role in her career. Also about how she came to be considered for Roman Holiday.
The paragraph about My Fair Lady is massive...I think the stuff about the Julie Andrews rivalry could be trimmed.
It would be nice to have some quotes from Audrey on why she withdrew from the industry.
What was she like as a person? What were her hobbies outside of acting?
I think the UNICEF section could quite easily be trimmed down. A lot of the quotes from her are essentially saying the same thing.
"Hepburn has been considered a gay icon" > Needs expansion.
It's a good idea to write a brief summary under the "Credits" and "Awards" sections so that they aren't completely blank.
You'll have a tough time justifying the use of those non-free pictures (the one with the Oscar and the My Fair Lady one). Publicity stills and film trailers from the era are generally considered public domain, so there's lots of material available to use.

It's a good article - far better that most other classic actor biographies. But it does need polishing. I could maybe help out with a bit of copy-editing (once the sources have been improved, since i think inevitably stuff will change by doing that) but I am occupied with other articles that I hold in much higher priority (I like Audrey, but don't have much interest in her)...we'll see. I hope these comments are helpful: I'm still pretty new to WP, but I've learned a lot through writing the Katharine Hepburn article (yep, sorry, I prefer the other Hepburn haha) and I'm basically repeating what I've been told. Feel free to hit me back with any questions either here or on my talk page. I hope you will keep on at the article, like you said - she's a real cultural icon so should have a good page. Good luck! --Lobo512 (talk) 12:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: I recommend reading this: User:Tony1/How to improve your writing. It's very helpful to understanding the desired style/tone on WP. --Lobo512 (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for replying with such pace! I agree completely: I need to invest in some biographies! That will definitely help this article's stability! Thanks for your supporting comments! I will consider looking through trailers to screencap some better photos! Thank you so much for your advice; I will work on it very soon! ;) Stephenjamesx (talk) 09:20, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]