Talk:Max Pirkis

Disputable Facts

4'3"? www.imdb.com says 5'8". Joelloughead 19:24, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

AGE

The kid does underage sex scenes in "Rome," lucky bugger

They're not exactly 'sex scenes' the sex part is just implied :P

Augustus

Why did they change actors for Octavian/Augustus in season 2 episode 4 of Rome? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.211.249.230 (talk) 18:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

Avalability maybe? You could ask the BBC. User:Green01 10:39, 21 Feb. 2006 (UTC).

I think it's because the sex scence in episode 9. He probably did not agree to expose himself in such manner, so he decided to leave at an agreed-upon point in the story. 87.70.137.223 (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Rome compressed a period of more than two decades into two series. There were 17 years alone from the murder of Caesar until the beginning of Augustus' principate. It could have hardly been portrayed convincingly by a 16 year-old - even as good an actor as Pirkis. --MattHelm77 (talk) 14:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mpirkis.jpg

Image:Mpirkis.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Max Pirkis/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 03:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

• I'll take this — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Fine
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Fine
	2c. it contains no original research.	Fine
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Reasonably comprehensive for a subject known for only two roles.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Fine
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Fine
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Per definition
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	None
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	None
	7. Overall assessment.	Pending

Comments

1

• "where he read Theology," - Read or studied?

• I was under the impression that they meant the same thing in AmE and BrE, "read" being the BrE term. Correct me if I'm wrong though!

• "Midshipman" - big m or small m?

• I've changed it to small m.

• Couple of these quotes could be paraphrased. ""didn't know what to expect. But I soon realised he was a pretty normal guy." for example

• I shortened/paraphrased that quote, but think the others are OK

• "Pirkis thought about the death of a family friend and completed it in two takes." - Perhaps clarify that he completed the scene in two takes and not the thoughts

• I've reworded this one. Let me know if my changes were what you intended.

• placed into a bank - a bank or a trust fund?

• This interview says a bank and this one simply says his earnings were "locked away".

• 4th Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards. - Perhaps note its origin

• I'm not sure what you mean here - should I mention who awards the prizes?

• Tom Shales' quote could be trimmed / paraphrased a bit

• I've trimmed it

• In BrE is it "second season" or "second series"?

• I changed to "second series".

Spotchecks

As of this revision:

• FN2
  • Should be archived
  • A Fine
  • B Fine
  • C Fine
  • D Fine
• FN5
  • A Fine
  • B Fails verification. Doesn't say anything about "not sure what to do with his life"

• I added a different citation (I think a few sentences got jumbled while I was improving the article... oops)

• • C Fine
  • D Fine
• FN9
  • A Fine
  • B Fine
• FN22
  • A Fine

Further discussion

• Holding for one week, mostly prose issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review! I have made the appropriate fixes or replied above. Ruby 2010/2013 00:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

• Alright, looks good. Passing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks again, Crisco. Ruby 2010/2013 03:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)