Wikipedia:Peer review/Rondo Hatton/archive1
This is my first wiki entry and I'd welcome any constructive criticism. Johnny Beggs 18:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Welcome to wikipedia! I think the article is a nice start. I should point out that peer review is meant for nearly Featured-standard articles. But since the article is listed here now anyway, here are some suggestions for expansions or clarifications:
- Is there any reason why his acromegaly was incorrectly attributed to his exposure to mustard gas? (i.e. is this a common mistake or a people simply blindly assuming)
- "Universal Studios attempted to exploit Hatton's acromegalic features" Is it possible to explain why it was an attempted exploitation instead of a normal business agreement?
- The article really needs a picture (but be aware of copyright issues)
- Happy editing! Jan van Male 22:42, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- References are always nice... Apart from that, how bout some pictures (as allready mentioned)? A filmography (or whatever it's called - a list of the films he played in)? A short overview of his service in WWI? In short.. anything that can bring this guy to life in the readers mind ;) WegianWarrior 06:25, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the great advice... I've added a picture and as complete a filmography as I can muster. As far as Hatton's WWI service goes, not much is really known. His acromegaly was attributed to his exposure to mustard gas because shortly thereafter symptoms of the disease became apparent. Today, however, we know that acromegaly is a hormonal disorder which Hatton probably developed prior to his service. I didn't really know how to include this in the article without straying. As for the "exploitation" comment: Hatton was reluctant to act and was never really happy with the studios for cashing in on his disfigurement. Again, I couldn't really think of a concise way of conveying this... but... maybe someone else could word it better? ...thanks again... (Johnny Beggs 10:05, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC))
- Might I suggest putting his filmography into a chronological order to make it read better? Harro5 07:52, May 23, 2005 (UTC)