Talk:Kate Beckinsale/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 03:45, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get started over the next few days.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:45, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well the more I get to know Kate B. the more I like her. However, there is a lot more to know. Since she is so stunning, successful and well-spoken, I wondered what kinds of commercial spokesmanships she might have. Google search results for the term "Kate Beckinsale" commercial lead you to Coke, Diet Coke, Absolut Vodka, Gap and Lux (or maybe it was this Lux company) commercials on the first page. Clearly, the article needs to devote some space to this subject.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't miss it but it took a bit longer to fix. Hope it's ok now. Popeye191 (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The text in the New York Times has a bit more detail about the campaign. Please add ref.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ref added Popeye191 (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you remove sex symbol listing detail? Make that a second paragraph in that section.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will rectify later today Popeye191 (talk) 15:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have now expanded this section Popeye191 (talk) 23:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • One last issue in this regard. The google search seems to suggest she did both Coke and Diet Coke ads, but you only mention DC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:32, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are some references to Coke ads but when you investigate the links, they all lead to the Diet Coke commercial. I think they were just using Coke as shorthand for the Coca-Cola brand.Popeye191 (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LEAD
Reference now made to her appearances in these two areas. Popeye191 (talk) 13:51, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do you think about moving her parent information into the same paragraph (which is currently stubby) with her other family information.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea - moved Popeye191 (talk) 14:35, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just realized that we did not teach the reader her career progression properly. It seems she started on stage at Oxford, got some TV roles, then began doing movies, she continued to mix in TV, stage and radio until the late 1990s and has since been exclusively big screen. Polish this summary up and put it towards the top of the LEAD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:44, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've now made reference to her earliest tv work. Some of the British costume dramas mentioned were aired on television rather than film (Emma) - does this require further clarification? Lead now states she went to the US for "film work". Would the stage work at Oxford require special mention as part of her career? It was student theatre rather than professional, paid work. Popeye191 (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why not say "After some student theatre and minor television roles"--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Popeye191 (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand the costume drama question.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that simply listing her roles in the costume dramas will suffice to inform readers that she worked on both film and television projects during this period Popeye191 (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is not clear to me that these works were on TV. It seems that only Emma was a TV movie. Maybe say British film and TV costume dramas.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clarified Popeye191 (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now mentioned Popeye191 (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I mistakenly removed them when trying to solve the overlinking problem Popeye191 (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Early Life
  • As I look more and more, I keep finding that I am satisfied with large swaths of text. This thing is not going to need any major surgery from what I have seen so far. I have not seen much of the main body, but hope it looks as good as the top section. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Early roles
  • As much as I like Much Ado About Nothing (It is the first movie I recall where the black guy gets to ride in on the white horse), describing this as "her first major role" needs some explanation. It was not a Lead role. Her billing was quite modest on the movie posters and in the credits. I am not even sure if she had a main supporting role.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. It was the first of her films to receive a cinematic release but the wording was misleading. Hope it's clearer now Popeye191 (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source that describes this as her breakout role?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the wording but People, for example, say "Beckinsale's star turn in Kenneth Branagh's 1993 adaptation of Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing established her as a screen presence at the age of 20." Popeye191 (talk) 13:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would feel much better describing an almost unbilled role in which she established herself as a screen presence as a breakout role than a starring role. I think this was her breakout role. What about using that adjective.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It just says "the role of Hero" now. It is definitely more than an unbilled part - Much Ado is about two couples - Benedick and Beatrice, and Claudio and Hero. She appeared in lots of publicity photos in advance of the film. And I'd prefer not to use the term "breakout" - I think that better describes her appearance Pearl Harbour. Popeye191 (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned in the Early Life section that she left Oxford before graduating - should I repeat it here? Popeye191 (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • When you mention reviews by major publications, you should usually mention the author. It would not surprise me if some of them are notable enough to have WP bios. At the very least, mention all other authors who have WP bios.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have now added author names throughout Popeye191 (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rectified Popeye191 (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • How do you interpret "Ms. Beckinsale's Emma is plainer looking than Ms. Paltrow's"? Kate isn't any plainer looking than Gwyneth if you ask me. Not sure about appearances in the roles. Did they make her up to look unduly frumpy or something?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Kate looked quite different in the earlier years of her career; definitely not as glamourous as she is now. Also, the Emma film with Paltrow was much frothier and glossier. Popeye191 (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My personal opinion is that Kate never looked significantly less glamourous than Paltrow, but you have a WP:RS. I think Gwyneth just has great spin doctors myself. Did Kate have some Butch period or something that I don't remember?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe she looked a lot less glam than I remember for a period. I see this photo now. I still don't think Gwyneth was that much hotter.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Kate as Emma, Gwyneth as Emma - it's not an important point, I mainly included it to try to remain objective and unbiased! As an aside, Kate did have a pretty butch phase in the mid-90s.
Goldilocks Paltrow!!!!--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Shooting Fish, one of the most successful British films of that year" Do you mean a critical success or a commercial success?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A commercial success - I have clarified the point now Popeye191 (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Hollywood
  • When you mention someone multiple times like Todd McCarthy, just use the last name after the first mention.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, you don't need to keep mentioning the affiliated newspaper (Roger Ebert of The Chicago Sun-Times). It may be possible to say Chicago Sun-Times critic Ebert on a second mention, but not every time.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit confused about the last two points. When first mentioned, it should be [full name] + [newspaper]. On the second and subsequent mentions, should it be [surname] + [newspaper] or just [surname]?Popeye191 (talk) 15:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First, I must say that there were even more notable critics than I had hoped for. Glad to see so much information about people who critiqued her. In response to your issue, we expect the reader to remember what we told him before in the text. Only surnames after first mention. In truth, once you say what media source the critic was affiliated with you need not mention it again, but if the name appears several times you can mention the source a 2nd time, although preferably not. However, if he voices his opinion in different fora, make sure to mention each one as appropriate. E.g., if he says something in the newspaper for one movie and while commenting during his TV show during another make this clear.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited the article so that only the author's surname appears on second and subsequent mentions. I think the policy is expecting a lot of wiki readers though - personally, if I read an opinion of "Claudia Puig of USA Today" in paragraph one and read an opinion of "Puig" in paragraph eight, I wouldn't remember who that was or what weight to give to her opinion Popeye191 (talk) 22:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We just expect them to know how to use Crtl-f if they forgot the person. A regular reader knows if only a surname appears, the full name was mentioned above.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:36, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense Popeye191 (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see any specific examples of where I have overlinked in the Move to Hollywood section. Isn't it acceptable to link again in a new section as the original link will no longer be on the viewer's screen?Popeye191 (talk) 14:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the article is extremely long (50KBish and this is only 30672 characters of readable prose) you are only suppose to link once in the text (except for tables and media captions).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excessive linking removed Popeye191 (talk) 15:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have corrected for Los Angles Times, Chicago Sun-Times and San Francisco Chronicle Popeye191 (talk) 15:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Action heroine roles
Domestically - have now clarified that it was at the US box office Popeye191 (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If it played internationally, add the worldwide number.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:26, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reference now made to worldwide figure instead Popeye191 (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think about saying $120 million in the United States domestic box office and over $300 million worldwide.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:20, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Popeye191 (talk) 06:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Return to small-scale drama
Now linked to in the lead section Popeye191 (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake, fixed Popeye191 (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Popeye191 (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First name not necessary throughout.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Popeye191 (talk) 20:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Upcoming projects
Have now tried to clarify this - she appeared in the third film in flashbacks only Popeye191 (talk) 20:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What about her role as narrator? Why don't you move Underworld 3 up to its proper sequential place in the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Voice only" comment from filmography table has been removed. Underworld 3 flashback info has been moved to the "Return to small-scale drama" section Popeye191 (talk) 06:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Text says flashbacks in a prequel. Wouldn't they have to be flashforwards?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to flashforwards Popeye191 (talk) 13:37, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Movie article credits her as narrator too. Why not mention in this article?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken a look at the movie article. While it says she was the narrator, the source offered only refers to the 2003 footage. I haven't found any legitimate reference which mentions that she did a voiceover. Kate herself has said in interviews that she didn't work on Underworld 3. Popeye191 (talk) 13:37, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Modelling work
  • I have done a lot of sex symbol articles and this is the best modelling section I have seen. I just wish there were a cosmetics company endorsement in there.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:10, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personal life
Excessive linking removed Popeye191 (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still no need to use his first name so many times.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed - have removed excessive use of "Len Wiseman" too Popeye191 (talk) 20:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am still seeing 3 Michael Sheens, plus the Michael [Sheen] in quotes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's now in the lead section, in a table and in a direct quote. Popeye191 (talk) 06:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lily Mo Sheen need not reappear in its entirety. In the second appearance just Lily Mo is fine.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:40, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Popeye191 (talk) 13:37, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DelinkedPopeye191 (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Other comments
Now mentioned in the Early Roles section Popeye191 (talk) 21:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does the book have a link that should be used in this article?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No wiki entry for the author or book Popeye191 (talk) 06:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What about Emma?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:57, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Link for Emma added Popeye191 (talk) 13:37, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I would have liked to include a section on charity work but there isn't much to work with. She has hosted a couple of parties for different charities over the years and said in an interview that the British Heart Foundation is her charity of choice (because of her father's early death). However, she isn't a patron or spokesperson for any charity, and hasn't been involved in any notable fundraising efforts.Popeye191 (talk) 21:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by hosted parties. Are these events that have been discussed in the public domain since she attained celebrity?
Is there a way to include and link the British Heart Foundation with sourced content in a paragraph with her parties? Would it be a stretch?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:31, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Added a few lines about charity work in the Personal Life section - see what you think (supported by bare refs until I get a chance to fix it later today). Also, the paragraph about smoking/alcohol looks very flimsy - should I add a couple of quotes or leave it be? Popeye191 (talk) 15:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Filmography
Have tried to fix Popeye191 (talk) 20:34, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your efforts. This is now a really good looking article. I hope you can keep it in shape over time. I have just passed this article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! Popeye191 (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kate_Beckinsale/GA1&oldid=455448541"