Wikipedia:Peer review/Joseph Gordon-Levitt/archive1

Joseph Gordon-Levitt

This peer review discussion has been closed.
. I've listed this article for peer review because I am going to be hanging out in the WP:PR now.

Yes "C" is for character actor. C-lister. This is as far as we can go, peer review!

This actor could be ending his film career compared to featured media biographies in the Wikipedia. After 2013 April I can expect this actor to become B before becoming classified as a "GA" and while it is a "GA" I can expect it to reach "A" level before becoming classified as a "FA". This is my peer review before requesting peer review and peer review just means I think we should talk about this topic because its article is about as far as we can go for now that if its topic were more important like Jake Gyllenhaal is then it would be "GA" or "FA" by now. Also, discussion sections before the one before this one should be archived as old discussions. They weren't necessary anyway. It just takes Joseph longer than Jake and I think he is not lower than Christina Applegate and Tobey Maguire but is quite even with Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes, Angelina Jolie, and Brad Pitt. Reese Witherspoon and Donnie Darko were big hits in the start of this century last decade. Kirsten Dunst starred in a Jewish history film, The Devil's Arithmetic, as you can see. The problem with him not being as good as Kirsten Dunst is he hangs out with C-listers like Piper Perabo and Kellie Martin. That's just the topic. That's just him. That's just Joseph. Things aren't our fault!

Hope he makes it to Humphrey Bogart B movie status and Wikipedia A-levels. "GA" class does not exist and "FA" class cannot be until after FAC. He has only since been in Picking Up The Pieces, Manic, Treasure Planet, and Latter Days if we are thinking of his latest film since before Wikipedia launched in 2001 and his 2003 film on Mormons. This is just yet another twentieth century dead guy posing as the living.

• well-written - short, simple, brief, in a so very Caucasian voice, but its professional standard is as minimal as merely trying to impress the reader on how stupid blonds can be.

• comprehensive - seeing as the topic is a younger James Dean who survives on family love, its C-list young actor status is short and to the point for we do not want to invade his privacy or even look like we want to stalk him.

• well-researched - online sources and Elliott Yamin rip-off.

• neutral - I don't want to know him, I just want to help him!

• stable - Nobody wants a fight with a killer.

• lead - It tells me who he is, who I am about to learn about, what recent films he is best known or most famous for, then moves on to tell me his first film, his best known and most famous hit TV show, before finally informing me of his most popular indie titles after college.

• appropriate structure - headings are aligned and titled correctly and properly. six headings are too perfect for a 666 name.

• consistent citations - online sources properly use footnote citations where needed.

• Media - Main picture in actor infobox.

• Length - This C-class article on a C-list actor is on nothing but Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and it does not ramble to useless topics outside of Joseph Gordon-Levitt that Joseph Gordon-Levitt does not have anything to do with. Except maybe the HitRECord. Which Joseph Gordon-Levitt appears to have everything to do with. Until further notice. Wikipedia does not actually exist in the original 2001.

GLGL. Good Luck Gordon Levitt. Be a rock god!

Thanks, CallieMacPherson (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC) Done