Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cantinflas/archive1

Cantinflas

Famour Mexican actor in the mid-1900s. Largely edited by User:Rockero and myself. It's well-referenced and comprehensive. Comments and suggestions are welcome. Lackluster Peer Review. User:Gflores 18:37, February 4, 2006

• Comment: The quoted passages (Monsiváis etc.) must be sourced. Andrew Levine 17:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Rockero is the editor who wrote those passages. I didn't notice he didn't cite it... I've now sent him a message. Gflores ^Talk 05:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Done (by Rockero). Gflores ^Talk 04:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Conditional Support - If sources are provided for the quotations (as above) —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 05:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Nice to see that they've been sourced. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 18:54, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose, with a heavy heart, until the following concerns are satisfied:
  • Can you confirm the existence of the "Santa María de Redonda" neighborhood. It is not listed in the Guía Roji ([1]). I'd also like to see from what source for this claim.
  • The circumstances leading to his "jump" from being a circus performer to film actor should be detailed.
  • Needs sources for the inheritance dispute.
  • The section on personal life feels a bit on the short side. This is a subjective complain, of course.
  • It is not clear who Miguel del Río is and why is he quoted in the cantiflismo section (given that it seems he doesn't have his own article). A short explanation in the footnote itself should be sufficient.
  • How is a pelado different from a peladito? I think I know the difference, but doubt the readers would.
  • Cantinflear was added to the Spanish dictionary in the 1990s (couldn't find the exact date) not in 1938.
  • Who wrote "Cantinflas and the Chaos of Mexican Modernity"? The sentence that mentions the book seems to be missing the name of the author.
  • In the bibliography section the number you provide for Su Excelencia looks like a library reference number rather than an ISBN.
  • In general, the tone of the article is too sympathetic to the point of being non-encyclopedic (e.g. "The 1940s and 1950s were Cantinflas' heyday." and a couple others I removed/edited on my copyedit).
  • (Sorry for not signing. First time it happens) -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 03:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks. We now have some constructive criticism to work with. It's actually Santa Maria la Redonda, and its a neighborhood, probably not an actual colonia. That's from Monsivais, but most sources say he grew up in the "notorious" Tepito neighborhood, so that should probably be mentioned too. I have no idea about the inheritance dispute. Del Rio wrote for Vea magazine and talked it seemed like his quote elaborated more on the concept of Cantinflismo (the Cantinflada that was a serious political joke), but I'm not sure what you mean by "given that it seems he doesn't have his own article"...you mean why doesn't del Rio have his own article?? A little puzzled there. I'll try to see if I can find when Cantinflear was added to the dictionary. There's some info on the Spanish article that can be incorporated on other words derived therefrom, too. Jeffrey M. Pilcher wrote the bio (Cantinflas and the chaos...), its listed in the references, but that section needs to be expanded anyways. I just started the book, so the nomination may have been a little premature. The ref number for Su Excelencia is a library of congress call number, I used it because there is no ISBN and I figured it was better than nothing. A lot of that fluffy stuff was in there already when GFlores and I started in on it. (Unless he's willing to take credit for it--I just hate to remove peoples' contributions, so if you wouldn't mind brutalizing it a bit, I'd appreciate it.) My own criticisms: The last paragraph on his awards and honors doesn't flow well, his influence on the Chicano theatre is unsourced, and there are two PD screenshots. I guess we have our work cut out for us. Thanks for the thorough review,--Rockero 06:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Neighborhood is synonymous to colonia. I know there's a cathedral of that name somewhere in the city but don't remember if it's in that neighborhood... in any case it doesn't matter since Monsivais is a reliable source. Tepito, by the way, is definitely notable for other reasons I won't elaborate in here.

About del Rio, I meant that you have to have to give context on who this guy is (i.e. justify why what he says about the subject is important enough to be quoted here). For all we know it could be the opinion of somebody's cousin who works in a grocery store.

On the missing ISBN you could make a note that that the number there is a LoC number, to avoid confusion since it is not self-evident.

I'll try to go in and hack some of the "pretty" the language in the article more thoroughly. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 19:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Minor objection - good article, but needs a few improvements. First, some of the prose seems a little heavy-handed. For example, the first few parapgraphs of "Personal life" seems dull and doesn't have a varied sentence sturcture (while reading, I noticed a lot of it was "Subject verb...". Spice it up!) Also, I'd like to see some more in-line citations. For example: According to one obituary, "Cantinflas" is a meaningless name invented to prevent his parents from knowing he was in the entertainment business, which they considered a shameful occupation. Which obituary? Can you provide a source for that? Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note?) 17:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Object Interesting article, but a couple of problems:

• No mention of his training For all of his many and varied skills, I'm curious about how he acquired them. "In the tents he danced, performed acrobatics, and performed in the roles of several different professions," plus dancer, stage actor, film actor, even his "exploration" of boxing and medecine. Did he have any formal training, did he have any mentors, was he entirely self-taught?
• "Personal life" section is poorly written It's choppy and practically point-form. --Tsavage 04:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)