Wikipedia:Peer review/Christopher Nolan/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Christopher Nolan[edit]

Previous peer review
Toolbox

* Further information

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has been worked on extensively in the last weeks/months, and need further guidance to reach GA/FA quality. Any advice or help is appreciated.

Thanks, Sammyjankis88 (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Loeba comments

Right, here are some comments related to the content of the "Early life" and "Career" sections. I'm still planning to go through and do a copy edit. I won't comment on the lead for now, because (as you admitted on my talk page) it needs considerable developing. I'll add some suggestions at the end.

  • We should probably be sourcing his full name and birth date in the "Early life" section.
  • If the father was British I'm not sure we need to know his Irish background..? Not a big deal though, I know that some people like knowing about heritage.
  • Any more information about his early interest in film and what drew him to the medium (maybe a quote?) would be nice.
Sammy comments; Is the one I added ok?
    • Hmm it's slightly repetitive of the previous statements...are there any others available? Specifically I was hoping for something about what drew him to making films. --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • "After graduation, Nolan directed corporate videos and industrial films." - Some elaboration on this topic would also be good, if possible.
  • Last para of Early years would be better placed in "1990s".
  • Was Doodlebug shown publicly? Reception?
Sammy comments; Don't think so really. Can't find anything useful.
  • Considering that Following was his first feature film, it would be interesting to have some comments from critics.
  • I think we need more info on Memento, particularly on its development. Not loads and loads, but I'd expect a few more lines of text at least.
    • Add later: I definitely think we should mention that it plays out backwards here, as well.
  • I notice that we aren't told who starred in any of the films. I'd add this information.
Sammy comments; I'm a bit cautious about this since Nolan uses large ensembles. I think this might open up to a name-drop thing like in the "Recognition" section. While I see the value in noting some of the actors (not always though), I also feel the "Collaborators" bit covers the most important info. Whaddayathink?
I think a lot of his films have a clear "lead" or two...I definitely think we should mention Pearce for Memento, Pacino for Insomnia, Bale for the Batman films, Jackman & Bale for Prestige, DiCaprio for Inception...maybe even some of the co-stars; as long as you don't get into a big list of names, I don't see it as a problem. --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • A plot outline for Batman Begins should be given.
  • The "overwhelming positive reviews" for TDK are not sourced.
  • Maybe it goes without saying, but I think it'd probably be worth stating outright that TDK continued with the dark themes of Batman Begins. And then give a plot outline.
  • "He agreed to the interview after speaking with producer Doug Blush at a piano recital featuring his son and Blush's daughter." - I don't really think this is needed.
  • The rather lengthy quote from Nolan regarding the TDKR shooting should be trimmed, maybe even cut altogether.
  • When talking about Transcendence , make clear that Wally Pfister is Nolan's regular cinematographer. And I don't think he's been mentioned before this point, so he should be wikilinked. And since this isn't a Nolan film, I think we should summarise the plot in a much briefer fashion.
  • Are the credentials of Kip Thorne needed?

Right, I will return for the final sections later today or tomorrow. As a general comment, I appreciate that the article doesn't ramble on about each film (which would be an easy temptation to fall into), but I think you could afford to add a bit more on each...it does feel a bit on the scarce side. A bit of commentary from film critics would be useful as well (again not too much, but a bit). Back soon... --Loeba (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Greatly appreciated, I will get to work on these points later today and in the coming days. As christmas is around the corner I might use a few extra days getting it all done.
Again, thanks a lot Loeba! Sammyjankis88 (talk) 15:51, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Carrying on...

  • "Aesthetics" means visuals/appearance, which not everything in this section is referring to. I'd go with something like "Filmmaking" or "Artistry".
  • I'm not sure you can give a mise-en-scene "philosophical subtext"..? Does the source definitely say this? Mise-en-scene usually refers to the set-up within the frame...I dunno, maybe he does try and give a subtext in this sense!
Sammy comments; A clumsy sentence indeed.
I did like the sentence, just with "mise-en-scene" removed. --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I wonder if there is a source we can use to say that his films have become more action-heavy (for the style section)? I definitely think of action as an aspect of his work these days.
Sammy comments; I could expand on this, but he has always used rapid editing and cross-cutting - common tropes in modern action-films. Not sure how to expand on that.
But he uses far more car chases, explosions, shoot-outs, etc than he used to. --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • This source (which is used) notes that "twist endings" are a common feature. Not sure how acceptable the source is, but I think for GA it would be okay.
  • I don't think we need to link "take".
  • "Nolan's work explores existential and epistemological themes such as subjective experience, memory, the nature of time, and construction of personal identity." - This should be expanded, really. It's so key to Nolan's work.
Sammy comments; Will look into this.
  • "Some related themes..", "Others have drawn parallels to..." - these are WP:WEASEL words. If you can cite these ideas to a specific critic (or two), do.
  • "In The Fictional Christopher Nolan, McGowan argues.." - We don't usually need to give the titles of books.
  • I'd recommend trying to find some more material on his theme of corruption...it really stands out to me as a theme of his work, there must be sources out there?
Sammy comments; Will look into this as well.
  • Hmm I'm not sure about including the Criterion list, as he could only chose his favourites from their list of titles. Since we already have a list of his favourite films, it's not really needed. But I can see how people may want to know about all the films he admires, so this isn't a point I feel strongly about. It's fine if you'd rather keep it.
Sammy comments; I think it could stay for now. It gives some info on his more eclectic taste, rather than the "obvious choices" for fav films.
  • I think "frequent collaborator" charts are considered a bit controversial on WP...some see them as WP:OR. I won't insist on its removal, but you may find someone who does. To cover yourself, you could try and source all the content in some way?
Sammy comments; I think past GA review and consensus in Talk pages is enough to take it down.
  • I'd put the information about him meeting his wife at uni in the personal life section.
  • " The name of their production company derives from "syncope", the medical term for fainting or loss of consciousness." - Not really needed on this page.
  • Do we know the names of his children?
  • The "Recognition" section is generally a bit choppy...Unavoidable to some degree, but see if you can give it a bit more flow (and perhaps a more general "introductory" statement about his current success, rather than diving straight in with polls etc?)
Sammy comments; Will have to do something new with this section. NPOV is always in danger in these sections. Thinking about it.
  • "Having made some of the most influential and popular films of his time," - Popular, yes, but influential?! It's a bit soon to say that, I think!
Sammy comments; That's not really a stretch (In this decade you'll be hard-pressed finding other filmmakers having the same impact) and it won't be a problem finding more sources. But I will have do some work in this section anyways.
I admit that I didn't read this properly: I thought it said "of all time". Yes, "of his time" is probably reasonable. --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • The list of directors who have "commended" him is pretty long, I'd cut it down to a select few.
  • Do we have a statistic for the combined gross of his films? Must be a couple of billion...
  • Hmm the awards table is a tricky one...I know they're all his films, but a lot of those awards and nominations won't have been for him personally. I think the section should probably just deal with his awards and nominations.
  • Not keen on the "See also" section. The company is linked in the lead, which is sufficient.

Images:

  • You'll have a tough time defending the use of the Heath Ledger one. Besides, there are better images we could use to capture the style and feel of Nolan's films. You could find a really good screencap to demonstrate how atmospheric and cinematic they are (which is sourced in the text, so should be okay under fair use).
  • There seems to be some decent images of him available on the commons that aren't used (including ones with his wife, which would be good for the personal life section) - [1]

Lead:

  • This is how I recommend rewriting it:
    • Two of three introductory lines that sort of sum him up and make people interested in the article.
    • A paragraph about his history, and because he hasn't directed many films you should touch on all of them.
    • A paragraph about his film style and reputation/reception.
Sammy comments; This section is my nemesis for sure.
Leads always seem daunting, but I bet when you get started on it you'll find things flowing more easily than you expect. :) As long as you know your subject matter, it shouldn't be too tough. --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I haven't checked if all the information is sourced, but please make sure that it is. A few of the sources look a bit dodgy, while the books aren't really used enough (this would definitely be necessary if you ever want to go for FA). That said, I think with a bit more content added on the areas I've suggested and some copy editing (which I will do when you've finished adding stuff), this is on track for GA. Well done! I will continue to keep an eye on the article and help out as I can. --Loeba (talk) 13:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Partly done:; At the end of this little session I will go over the sources. There is plenty of literature on Nolan waiting to be used.

Follow-up comment: Another thing I'd like to recommend is giving his career a sense of "story" - how it developed, how he continued to become more popular and successful. Adding in things like "The film marked Nolan's breakthrough..." "Nolan received widespread attention with.." "Nolan's fame/acclaim continued to grow..." will enhance the article. Anything like this needs to be sourced of course, but I imagine there are some articles that have reviewed his entire career and will provide good references? Let me know when you think you've addressed all my comments above and I'll work on a copyedit. Cheers! --Loeba (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Sammy. I've taken a crack at most of your suggestions, some with more grace than others. I think it's pretty strong content wise though. It was a struggle finding good sources for some of the stuff, and there is some points I haven't done yet. I'll write/find something about the themes of corruption and fear of conspiracy when I've read through some texts on his work. I've got my hands on David Bordwell's new "book", and I know of some other pieces as well. That will take some time though, I have a lot of work in the coming weeks. I will also have to take a stab at that lead and find new photos for the "Filmmaking" section, but saving that for dessert (aka postponed til the very end...) You have already helped out a great deal, but if you find the time for a copyedit that would be super. Again, appreciate your time and effort to help me out. Sammyjankis88 (talk) 20
46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)