Talk:James Gandolfini

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the James Gandolfini article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article contains a translation of James Gandolfini from en.wikipedia.

Daily article pageviews

Graphs do not work. You can go to the graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org.

Comments for improving article[change source]

TDKR asked for suggestions on making this a good article. Here are some of comments based on a quick look.

You don't need a ref for every sentence. That makes the article look messy. Here's one way to reduce that: if you have more than one sentence in a row that uses the same reference, just put the ref after the last one.
The article says that Gandalfini was raised in Naples, and also that he grew up in New Jersey. Where did you find that he was raised in Naples? The enwiki article doesn't say that, it says that his mother was raised in Naples. It looks like you were simplifying the enwiki article and didn't get it quite right.
There is a lot of simplifying still needed, both for words and sentence structure. Look at every sentence and try to think of a simpler way to write it. Use simpler words. Make each sentence be about one thing. For example, there is a sentence that says where he grew up, what high school he graduated from, and what he did at that school. That should be at least three separate sentences.

Take care of some of that, and I'll look at it some more later. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About Auntof6's point of too many refs: there's no need for a lot of citations in the lead paragraph because the relevant material has already been cited in the infobox. You could remove them (someone else please confirm that I am not violating MOS). Chenzw Talk 02:56, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about now? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:58, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You could still remove some refs. In some places, there are several sentences in a row that all have the same ref. You could remove the refs from all but the last in each group. The ref at the end would be the ref for all the stuff before. There's still some more simplifying to do, but you did a really good job with what you've done so far! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:07, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me the areas were I can remove the references and what words need to be simplified? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've described one situation twice. Look for places where there are multiple sentences in a row that have the same reference. Remove the reference(s) from all but the last one. If you do that, I will look at it some more. If that's not clear, please tell what's not clear and I will try to explain better. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is over-referenced. His name doesn't need to be referenced nor his dates. These need only be ref if there's some doubt about them. I've refashioned the lead here for your consideration:

"James Joseph Gandolfini, Jr. (September 18, 1961 – June 19, 2013) was an American movie and television actor. He played Tony Soprano in the HBO television series, The Sopranos. He won (exact number here) Emmy Awards for his performance in the role."

Oregonian2012 (talk) 22:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oregonian, that is an excellent simplification. It says what he was known for without using the phrase "he was known/notable/famous for". It's specific instead of vague about the number of awards. In short, it's not just simple writing, it's good writing, something I think we could use more of. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To me, no problems. --Aaqib Hola! 23:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anymore suggestions? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:07, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It still needs more simplifying. I'm not really interested in working on the article in any great detail. Why don't you try one of the tools that give an indication of the reading level. The next time you want to add this much detail from enwiki to an article, it might be better to work on it in your userspace first. It's unreasonable to add a lot of non-simple text in mainspace and expect others to help fix it. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:35, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]