Talk:Frank Underwood (House of Cards)/GA2

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: Christine (talk · contribs) 19:50, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm reviewing this article. As per my practice, I fill out the template and then conduct a prose and source review. Tony already knows that I tend to be thorough (and picky), so I won't make that disclaimer. ;) Don't watch the show, so I'm interested in the introduction. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:50, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Strong article, close to passing to GA. It looks like there was some good work done on the previous unfinished GAC, but there are still some minor issues to address.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    Minor issues; see below for prose review.
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    I'm not so sure about how this article is structured. I've never liked "Relationships" sections in articles about fictional characters; very few of FAs and the best GAs have them. Plus, the sub-sections "Bisexuality" and "Ancestry" don't fit there. I suggest removing those sections and folding in the content into other sections. See below for my ideas about how to do that.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    This, unlike many character articles, doesn't have anything about casting. I'd think that with all the information about the series out there, that they'd be stuff about why Spacey was chosen to play Frank (other than he's awesome, ya know). I also think that the comparison between Underwood and Urquhart should be presented differently; see below for more detail.
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    There seems to be some reversions of unsourced information by IPs, and more-than-usual amount of collaboration here (mind you, that's not a bad thing), but it seems to be under control.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    Currently, there are no images, just quoteboxes. Couldn't you include images of the cast, at least Spacey, Wright, or Mara? I would also think that you could also get away with a screenshot.
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    Nothing to access here.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Not ready yet. Good luck, see below for a more thorough prose and source review. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 01:04, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prose review[edit]

As I state above, I'm not sure about the format of this article. I think that you could do without the "Relationships" section, and fold the content into other sections. I would re-name the first section "Background", and keep the comparison between Underwood and Urquhart there. If you can find any information about "Casting", and how Spacey was chosen, this would be where I'd put it, although that's just a suggestion, and not a requirement for this article to pass to GA. (Although if you want to go further, you'd need it.) Then I'd fold the content in the "Relationships" section in here; I'll let you decide how to do that. I also wonder if you should put the "Underwood vs. Urquhart" section first, before you start talking about Underwood, since it feels more chronological. I especially like how you've avoided a "Storylines" section, which I personally strongly dislike, and that you've divided up "Critical response" into seasons.

Background

  • I think that this would be the place to fold in the content from the later "Ancestry" section, about Frank's ancestor, at the end of this section's 1st paragraph. It fits, since you mention Frank's military background with his attendance at the Sentinel.
  • 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: As much as I love serialized commas, this is where they get us in trouble. The current version of this sentence makes it sound like each item in the list are schools, even though common sense tells us they aren't. One way to fix that is to put the description of the Sentinel is parenthesis and then remove the commas.
  • Spacey's prior role to Underwood had been in Shakespeare's Richard III as the classic fourth wall breaching Richard III of England, a character that serves as a partial basis for both Urquhart and Underwood. If you had info about casting here, this might better go here. As it is, it feels out of place to me; at the very least, it needs a stronger transition. Before I make a suggestion, I have a question: did Richard III inspire the writers of House of Cards to break the fourth wall? If so, you could change the wording to reflect that, and then connect Spacey with both roles. Also, did the producers pick Spacey because of his experience as Richard, or was it coincidental?
  • The character speaks in a southern dialect. This feels out of place here. You could either put it with the sentence in the first paragraph about his hometown, or in the 1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph, like this: "Much of Underwood's dialogue, spoken in his characteristic southern dialect..." (You don't need "throughout the series"; I think that's self-evident.)
  • Outside of politics and time smoking and scheming with his wife, one of his few vices is video games. Doesn't make sense: "politics and time smoking and scheming"?
  • Why did the poor guy have to give up video games; does it have anything to do with his role as VP?
  • Spacey viewed continuing to portray Underwood for a second season as a continuing learning process. "Continuing" is repetitive. I think you could just omit the first one and then omit "to" and change "portray" to a present participle ("-ing").
  • Spacey's quote is too long; I think you should paraphrase at least some of it.
    • I really like that quote. I have shortened the part that I use. I am willing to end the quote at the word "character" if that would make it better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Underwood vs. Urquhart

  • I think that you switch tenses too much in this section; many of my suggestions try and correct for that.
  • I think you could combine the 1st two sentences, like this, which would also do away with the repetition: "Underwood is an Americanized version of the original BBC character Francis Urquhart, a Machiavellian post-Margaret Thatcher chief whip of the Conservative Party." You should also link "Machiavellian".
  • Next sentence: Change "he employed" to "he employs".
  • According to series producer Willimon, the name change stemmed from the "Dickensian" feeling and "more legitimately American" sounding resonance of the name Underwood. This is the first time you mention Willimon, so you should cite his full name and link it. Was Willimon the one who changed the character's name? If so, I have a suggestion, but I need to hear your answer first. Also, the Dickens reference confuses me; it's strikes me as odd that the American version would be "Dickensian", unless you mean that Urquhart's name is that way, and not Underwood's.
  • Urquhart was one of television's first antiheros, whereas Underwood follows the more recent Tony Soprano, Walter White, and Dexter Morgan. This is a little confusing to me. First off, you state that Uruhart was an antihero, but infer that Underwood and the list of American characters are not. I think that perhaps you're comparing UK TV and American TV, that in the UK, antiheroes aren't as common as they are in the U.S. If so, you should reword this sentence to reflect that. Also, although you link the characters' names, I think that you should identify (and link) their shows.
  • ...creator and showrunner Beau Willimon said he drew regular inspiration from Lyndon B. Johnson as a repeated source for themes and issues. How about this, to tighten the prose a bit: "...creator and showrunner Beau Willimon said he was often inspired by Lyndon B. Johnson, who was a source for themes and issues addressed in House of Cards."

Season 1

  • How does Frank ensure that Walker becomes president?
    • Given what we see of his character, I can only imagine what kinds of dastardly things he might have done. However, we are not told. We meet Frank at the time of Walker's inauguration.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • He is informed of this by Presidential Chief of Staff Linda Vasquez (Sakina Jaffrey) prior to the January 2013 United States presidential inauguration, which provokes him to hatch a plan. Passive voice; how about: "Presidential Chief of Staff Linda Vasquez (Sakina Jaffrey) gives him this news prior to the January 2013 inauguration, which provokes him to hatch a plan."
    • I made the change but kept the full inauguration link. Did you want me to pipe that?--22:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Time television critic James Poniewozik notes that by the end of the first episode, Frank establishes that his metaphor of choice is meat because both literally and figuratively it is his preference. Could be tighter; how about: "According to Time television critic James Poniewozik, by the end of the first episode, it becomes clear that Underwood both literally and figuratively uses meat as his metaphor of choice."
  • Next sentence: too long. How about: "He may begin a day with a celebratory rack of ribs, because "I’m feelin’ hungry today!", but he depicts his life with meat metaphors. For example, he describes the White House Chief of Staff with grudging admiration: "She’s as tough as a two-dollar steak", and plans to destroy an enemy the way "you devour a whale. One bite at a time." He also endures a tedious weekly meeting with House leaders, as he tells the audience, by "[imagining] their lightly salted faces frying in a skillet."

I'll stop here, and try to get to more in a couple of days. Should keep you busy for now. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 01:08, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Season 2

  • I think you could divide up this paragraph more, perhaps after the quote that ends ...threats mount on all fronts and also make a third paragraph that begins with According to Sara Smith...
  • The season begins with Frank attempting to erase all links to season 1's death of Congressman Peter Russo (Corey Stoll). I think this would be tighter: "At the beginning of the season, Underwood is trying to erase all links to season 1's death of Congressman Peter Russo (Corey Stoll)."
  • According to Sara Smith of The Kansas City Star, Frank teases the audience about his use of the technique of breaking the fourth wall by delaying its use until the end of the first episode before coyly asking "Did you think I’d forgotten you?" he inquires. "Perhaps you hoped I had." This makes it sound like Frank orchestras the literary technique, something I doubt even he, as a fictional character, can do. Also, be consistent how you refer to him; I think it should always be his last name. How about: "According to Sara Smith of The Kansas City Star, Underwood fails to break the fourth wall as he had done throughout the first season until the end of the first episode in this season, when he finally asks the audience..."
  • Next sentence: What do you mean by "subsequently"? Does Frank say this in every episode of season 2? Also, I don't think that you need to include the first quote in the box, since you use it in the body of this section.
  • It seems that you're missing some information here, and that you've only talked about the early part of the season. For example, there's nothing about how he became president, which I'd think is kind of important.

Critical response

  • I don't have much to review here, since the majority of the prose are quotes. I highly recommend that you go through and paraphrase many (if not most) of them.

Awards and nominations

  • Among those nominations was Spacey's portrayal of Frank Underwood... I think that this sentence is too long and a little confusing. How about this: "For the first time, three Primetime Emmy nominations for lead roles were from web television series: Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series to Spacey for his portrayal of Frank Underwood, Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series to Wright for her portrayal of Claire Underwood, and Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series for his portrayal of Michael Bluth in Arrested Development."
  • The role has also earned Golden Globe Award for Best Actor – Television Series Drama and Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Drama Series nominations. A role can't earn anything, so how about: "Spacey also earned a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actor in a Television Series Drama and a Screen Actors Guild nomination for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Drama Series nominations."

Relationships

  • Even though I think that the content here should be folded into other parts of the article, I'll look at the prose here and then make suggestions for where they should go.

Claire

  • Michael Dobbs compares the compelling nature of the relationship between Frank and Claire favorably to the original characters... Since you bring up the Macbeths in the same sentence, it's a little confusing as to who you mean. I assume you're talking about the UK characters, so how about: "Michael Dobbs compares the compelling nature of the relationship between Frank and Claire favorably to the characters in the original British show..."
  • ...Claire presents a woman urging on her husband's assertion of power in the image of Lady Macbeth. A little unclear; how about: "...Claire, like Lady Macbeth, encourages her husband's assertion of power."
  • This gives a credibility to their symbiosis. What gives credibility?
  • I'm not sure I understand Mary McNamara's comments; could you clarify and/or expand?

Zoe

Bisexuality

  • The article by David Carr and Ashley Parker points out that although it is not clear what the revelation of this semester tells us about his choices, we never see Frank and Claire have sex in season 1. I think this could be tighter; how about: "According to David Carr and Ashley Parker, although it is unclear how the experience influenced his choices, we never see Frank and Claire have sex in season 1."
  • Suggestion: After thinking about it for a bit, I think that the "Relationships" section, with the subsections about Claire and Zoe, should be moved to the "Background" section. Then you should remove the "Bisexuality" section and fold the content into "Background", with the transitional sentence, "Underwood's sexuality is unclear throughout much of the first two seasons." Then in the 2nd sentence, you'd change "Francis" to "his".

Ancestry

  • This section should be removed, and then the content folded in the 1st paragraph of the "Background" section, after the 1st sentence.
  • The fictional universe tone breaks down here; I think you should add the word "fictional" before naming the corporal. This is what I'd do with these sentences: "Underwood's great-great-great grandfather was Corporal Augustus Elijah Underwood, who died at the age of 24 serving the 12th Regiment of McGowan's Brigade at the Bloody Angle engagement in the American Civil War. Underwood's great-great grandfather was 2 when his father was killed."

Lead

  • I tend to review the lead last, after I'm familiar with the rest of the article.
  • Same problem with Underwood's school list as mentioned above.
  • The character has been described as evil, conniving and even Machiavellian while receiving significant critical praise. He is one of the several 21st century antiheros that have appeared on television to much critical acclaim. A little repetitive. How about combining these ideas, like this: "The character, one of the several 21st century antiheros that have appeared on television, has been described as evil, conniving, and Machiavellian but has received significant critical praise."

I will stop here, and consider looking at the references separately. At first glance, they seem fine for GA, but I'll take a closer look in a day or so. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First off, sorry that I dropped the ball with this review, and that I spaced it; my only excuse is that I've busy and distracted by other RL and WP projects. Tony, thanks for your patience and for pinging me. I'm satisfied with your changes, and I've done a cursory source review, and all looks good for this article to pass to GA. Thanks for your hard work and diligence, and for introducing me to this show. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Frank_Underwood_(House_of_Cards)/GA2&oldid=601580925"