Talk:Penélope Cruz/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: I fixed two disambiguations.diff

Thank you for fixing the disambiguation links. Crystal Clear x3 17:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linkrot: I fixed two dead links.

I've made the two dead links into tree links. Crystal Clear x3 17:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed citation needed tags from the lead, as generally leads do not nned citing as they are summaries of the entire article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 17:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
At 15, she eventually was signed by an agent and made her acting debut at 16, and her feature film debut the following year in Jamón, jamón (1992). "eventually was signed" implies that something had been going on before, but it, whatever "it" is, is not mentioned.
Fixed Cry'stal Clear x3 20:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Repetitious phrases, poor grammar.~~

She has appeared in an eclectic range of films Who says so?
I do not have a reliable source that says that she has "appeared in an electric range of films", but would it really need a source, because in the lead of the Featured Article Maggie Gyllenhaal it has the same phrasing without a source in the body of the article that specifically says "electric range of films".... Crystal Clear x3 18:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
eclectic is not the same as electric! They are completely different words! Just because other articles have similar faults or features does not mean that it is acceptable. If you can't provide a source for eclectic take the word out. As it stands, it constitutes a point of view
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 01:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All in all the lead is poorly written. You did get this copy-edited before nominating it, didn't you? Perhaps you could let me know who did the copy-edits so that I make sure they don't get used for any articles that I write.
I did not have another editor copy-edit this article before submitting it for a GA. Crystal Clear x3 20:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Might I suggest that you do so as previously mentioned in another review. It would save the reviewer and yourself a lot of trouble. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When Cruz was a teenager she began having an interest in acting after seeing the film, Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down by up-and-coming Spanish director Pedro Almodovar.Soon after seeing the film, she began doing casting calls for the same agent, but was rejected multiple times because the agent felt that she was to young. Who is this "same agent"? The way this is written implies that it is Almodovar himself.
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 18:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the agent felt that she was to young "to"?
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 18:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After being signed by an agent in 1989, in the next two years, Cruz hosted the Spanish television talk show La Quinta Marcha. The following year Cruz made her feature film debut at 17 as the lead female role in the romantic drama art house film, Jamón, jamón. Right this is unclear, badly written and contradictory. You need to make clear the La Quinta Marcha was a progarmme hosted by teenagers, aimed at a teenage audience. "The following year " Which following year is this? Spell it out, in 1993 or what ever. "romantic drama art house film,"? This was a big hit throughout the Spanish speaking world. It is a comedy drama, a satire, but hardly a romantic drama.
Done Crystal Clear x3 18:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'~~'and in Hjørne af paradis, Et as Doña The title of the film is Et hjørne af paradis~~
Fixed

Open You Eyes generally received positive reviews[14] and was not commercially successful, grossing a worldwide total of $370 thousand, all of which came from the United States. "Your" This is just sloppy and careless. if you think you can just throw stuff together and make a good article, you are sadly wrong.
How can all of a film's "worldwide gross" come from one country, the US? The film played throughout the Spanish language market. This source [1] gives Us figures, but doesn't actually list any world wide figures, so inferring that the country that recived box office income is WP:OR

Fixed

~~#:::: Fixed Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

''The following year, Cruz appeared in her first American film as Billy Crudup's consolation-prize Mexican girlfriend in Stephen Frears' western film, The Hi-Lo Country." The paragraph before has a comment about "some really bad reviews for her recent American work,", so how come this is suddenly her first American film.
~~The Montreal Film Journal review was from 2002, years after she appeared in her first American film. I've clarified this in the article. Crystal Clear x3 18:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

Cruz performance in the film received critical praise, with Jonathan Holloland of Variety magazine wrote this is semi-literate. Not done Take another look, the phrase is still there. "with Jonathan Holloland of Variety magazine wrote" !!! Cruz's performance, niot Cruz performance. You aare also overusing this phrase.
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 01:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~#:::: Fixed Crystal Clear x3 19:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

That same year, phrases to avoid.
Done Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Replacing with Also in is just as bad.~~

''For Cruz, the early 2000s were a period of her film's getting mediocre and negative reviews and mixed commercial successes. Very poor grammar.
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 18:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Deep's character's wife. I think you mean Johnny Depp?
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the film she played Pelagia, a female who falls in love with another man while her fiancé's in battle during World War II. apalling grammar.
I've re-worded the sentence. Crystal Clear x3 22:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

but was successful at the box office, making $62 million worldwide. Next sentence She had a minor role in Waking Up in Reno in 2002; the film received broadly negative reviews and was a box office failure, making $267 thousand worldwide. Explain this inconsistency.
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 22:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

but was unable to compensate it's $160 million budget. What is that supposed to men?
Its suppose to mean that while the film in general had a good revenue its revenue still was not enough for the film itself to be a commercial success, hence its inclusion on Moviefone's 'biggest flops list'. Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cruz appeared in the 2006 Western comedy film, Bandidas, portraying María Álvarez, a poor farm girl who turn's to robbing bank's with a wealthy friend in an effort to combat a ruthless enforcer terrorising their town. More grocer's apostrophes.
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 19:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That same year, Cruz received favourable reviews for her performance as Raimunda That same year agin.
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The film received generally negative reviews this could be phrased better.
Done Crystal Clear x3 18:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Later that year, she starred in Woody Allen's Vicky Cristina Barcelona as María Elena, a mentally unstable woman; in the film Cruz spoke both Spanish and English. Is this supposed tio imply that only mentally unstable people can speak both Spanish and English? What is the point of this statement?
I have removed the sentence about her speaking two languages in the film. Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cruz's next film was the kid-friendly Who says it is "kid-freindly"?
The source I provided describes the film as "kid-friendly", would you prefer If I removed it? Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'~~'The film generated broadly negative reviews poor grammar.~~
In Featured Article's like Maggie Gyllenhaal terms like "The film generated broadly negative reviews" are used, would you prefer if I re-worded the phrasing? Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Claudia Puig of USA Today was somewhat less enthusiastic with her performance, writing that while Cruz "does a steamy song and dance," her "acting is strangely caricatured. Somehwtar less enthusatric than whom?
Fixed. Crystal Clear x3 18:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life: This appears to be just a collection of sentences thrown together randomly, some of it verging on trivia.
I've re-organized the sentences in the 'Personal life' so that the information is more consistent. In my POV I do not think that the information included in the Personal life section is "trivia" because I think that mentioning that she owns two houses, speaks four languages, was a vegetarian, owns a stray animal, is close with her family, as well as her relationships, endorsements, charity wok, view of the media and fashion line, are note-worthy. Crystal Clear x3 19:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

O~~verall, very poorly written. Lead does not comply with WP:LEAD, needs a complete re-structuring and rewriting.~~
I think I've corrected this problem now. Crystal Clear x3 00:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that is much better now.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
There is a failed verification tag in the Personal life section.
I have removed the unverifiable information from the 'Personal life' section. Crystal Clear x3 17:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What makes ref #1 [Yahoo Corazon!] a reliable source?

Reference 1(now reference 2) is the Spanish Yahoo, from what I've seen Yahoo is generally considered to be a reliable source. Crystal Clear x3 20:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #2 appears to be to a web site, but no link is provided.
The reference is a tree link. Crystal Clear x3 20:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can't cite a web site and then say it is a "tree link"! fixed by finding another reference. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 18:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #12 doesn't say she "appeared in ten low-budget Spanish and Italian films." It just lists her films. Surmising the statement is WP:OR
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 20:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #27 ( "Film Review: All the Pretty Horses". Detroit News.) needs publication date and byline of reviewer.
Done Crystal Clear x3 20:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #28 [2] needs publication date
Done Crystal Clear x3 20:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #32 ( Alter, Ethan. "VANILLA SKY". Film Journal International (Nielsen Business Media Inc).) needs publication date
Done Crystal Clear x3 21:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #60 [3] is actaully the Los Angeles Times, not the Tribune Company
The Tribune Company publishes The Los Angeles, hence it serves as the publisher to The Los Angeles Time divisions. Crystal Clear x3 20:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #61 (Staurt, Jan. "Movie Reviews: 'Volver'". Newsday.) needs a publication date
Done Crystal Clear x3 21:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #65 {McDonagh, Maitland. "The Good Night". TV Guide. OpenGate Capital) needs a publication date
Done Crystal Clear x3 21:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #66 (Edelstein, David. "Scandal Janitor (Page 2)". New York Magazine.) needs a publication date
Done Crystal Clear x3 21:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #88 ("Late Show with David Letterman" NBC January 2007.) needs precise transmission date
Done Crystal Clear x3 21:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref #95 ("Cruise Controlled". Hispanic 14 (12): p. 18.) needs a publication date
I've removed the reference. Crystal Clear x3 21:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, all adddressed
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
This article completely fails to look at the subject from the perspective of her native culture and language, Spanish. It is extremely US-centric. Cruz is known world wide and this is barely mentioned. There are reams of Spanish sources out there, go and find out what they think of her.
I've added mention of her receiving nominations from Spanish awards, such as the Goya Award and the European Film Award, throughout her career, although I've been having a somewhat difficult time finding sources that describe her worldwide recognition, or that discuss her Spanish and Italian film roles from 1993 to 1996, references like this make a brief mention of her films from 1993 to 1996 and discuss her career from 1997 onward. Do you know of any reliable source(s) that could provide the information that you would like added into the article? Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 02:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about the Spanish language press? Try these for starters. If you use the advance search options in Google news you can specify Spain as the country from which you want sources. Believe me there is plenty written about her in the Spanish language. Please try and understand that this is a world encyclopaedia so if you are writing about a Spanish person, find sources in Spanish is part of the job of writing a good artcile about the subject. This is really important, if the the "broad" coverage criterion is to be met. If you can't satisfy this then the article will fail listing. I would expect to see reviews of her performances in Spanish language films from Spanish language sources especially, and stuff about here life and career from Spanish language sources.–– Jezhotwells (talk) 06:40, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Doing... Crystal Clear x3 07:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Head in the Clouds performed poorly at the box office, and was more successful internationally than domestically. Head in the Clouds is a British-Canadian film - what is the "domestic" market that you are referring to?
Fixed Crystal Clear x3 07:08, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well maybe, but you are still focussing on a US point of view in a way that means if this stands the article will fail. Whether or not an international film does well at the US box office is not really an important point. Please address the US-centric bias of this article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 07:18, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is a "US point of view" in the sentence "Head in the Clouds performed poorly at the box office."?! In that sentence it does not name a specific territory, it means in general worldwide. Is there another way you would like the sentence to be worded? Crystal Clear x3 07:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is the whole article that I am talking about. The original version of the sentence was a prime example where you had an assumption that the domestic market was the US, because you used an American source. In fact the film took a respectable 3.5 million worldwide and won a number of awards in Canada and Italy. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 10:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I get what your saying, but what does the film itself and other actors in film receiving awards for their roles have to do with Cruz? Crystal Clear x3 16:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was the film (and costume and score} that won awards. My point is that you (in that specific sentence) originally chose to focus on the US box office take, rather than the worldwide box office which was respectable for a low budget film. This article is about a Spanish actor who has made more films outside of the US than in it. Currently it appears to focus rather more on the US aspects of her career which is not balanced. The material in the article at the moment is primarily referenced from US sources. A cursory read of the Spanish press and Spanish online sources shows me that there is much more to be said about her non-US career. For instance, what about her relationship with Almodavar who has often decribed Cruz as his muse? Actually, there is quite a lot about that in the English language press as well. Her role in Pirates of the Caribbean IV is now confirmed, she was guest editor fro french Vogue, focussing on larger sized models in a controversial move, she will be working with Sergio Castellitto on Venuto al mondo, she is the new face of Lancôme, etc, etc. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added into the article that she has become the ambassador of a Lancome perfume, I've added mention of her editorial in the French Vogue, and that she is contracted to appear in the 4th P.o.t.C. film and Venuto al mondo; I've sourced some of those things with Spanish sources. I'm currently working on replacing some US sources with Spanish ones. ~~and adding mention of Almodavar describing Cruz as his muse.~~ Crystal Clear x3 21:52, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added mention of her friendship with Almodavar in the personal life section of the article. I'm continuously adding Spanish references into the article as well as Spanish reviews of her acting. Crystal Clear x3 02:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, all addressed, much better now
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
1. On hold for improvements to be made, I shall check regularly. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually you are introducing as many faults as you are correcting. It is clear that you don't have the ability to copy-edit. Fair enough, not every one does. So please take this away and get it copy-edited. I really find it difficult to try and make sense of badly written articles which should never have been nominated at WP:GAN. If you can get it fixed by Monday 3 May, OK - if not I shall fail this nomination allowing you time to get the article into good shape. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have placed a request for help at WT:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers#Penélope Cruz. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Doing...I am doing copy edits Diannaa ^TALK 03:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC) Done I have completed copy edits as best I could given the quality of the writing. Diannaa ^TALK 04:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think the artcile is sufficiently improved to merit Ga status, the prose could do with more work. please remember to get copy-editing and a peer review before nominating articles of this complexity at WP:GAN. I am happy to list this as a Good article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 18:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 21:59, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]