I was pleasantly surprised when this article, which I'd greatly improved as part of my work on The Devil Wears Prada (currently undergoing a peer review of its own) was given an assessment of A-class this morning despite three statements flagged as needing citations. So I took care of them. Any suggestions before I take it to GAC? Daniel Case 03:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reading this! I was beginning to worry that no one cared enough.

Much of your very good criticism will probably be taken care of by a forthcoming expansion. Daniel Case 02:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm afraid the second and the third paragraph repeat the same things. Maybe they should be merged or re-phrased.

• • It's likely that they will be ... I have been doing more research (i.e., reading Jerry Oppenheimer's biography). I had written that because I couldn't see where to put the bit about the sunglasses

• "Her salary is reported to be $2 million a year.[1]" Avoid stubby one-sentence paragraph like this one. Merge or expand.

• • That's because I took something out that wasn't sourced. I have a source for it now, and it can go back in.

• "Politics" is too stubby. If you cannot expand the section merge it with another one.

• • Same thing.

• "There have also been accusations that she has imposed an elitist aesthetic on the magazine, promoting celebrities over fashion personalities and making demands that even prominent subjects change their image before being featured in its pages." Assertions like this one need citing.
  • They are cited further down in the body of the article, but I'll put them in the intro.
• I think you overanalyze The Devil Wears Prada. Most of this material should be moved to the film's or book's article through WP:SS.
  • The film article is long enough as it is, and the book article needs a lot of reworking. Some of it could probably go there, though. I'll see what I can do to trim it down and keep it relevant.

    But it is important.

• "She has often been the target". Personally I do not like a new section to start with "she". Who's she? "Wintour ... " looks to me better. But maybe it is just a personal preference.
• "In Paris in October 2005 ..." The trend is to wikilink full dates (date-month-year) not year alone or month-year. Check WP:MoS about dates.
  • I didn't do that; someone else did.
• "She has often been the target of various animal rights organizations such as PETA who are angered by her use of fur in Vogue, her pro-fur editorials and her refusal to run paid advertisements from animal rights organizations. Undeterred, she continues to use fur in photo spreads. She is routinely assaulted by activists over this matter." Uncited. Try to have at least one citation for each paragraph of your article.
  • Again, cited further on down.
• "Wintour has been accused of exercising ... have also been criticized as being motivated ... despite its heavy reliance on advertising dollars". Mixing styles?
  • Not quite sure what you mean here ...
    • That you mix American with English spelling. Am I wrong? If yes, diregard this comment.--Yannismarou 13:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes. All three of those are the generally accepted and widely-used American spellings. Daniel Case 17:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• "Popular culture" is a trivia listy section. Especially in FA such sections are not esteemed at all. If you could make it proper prose or incorporate its material in other sections ...--Yannismarou 17:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will do. I can probably use the DWP stuff to springboard that. Daniel Case 02:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]