WikiProject Films
General information ( v • d • e ) Main project page + talk  → Discussion archives Style guidelines talk  → Naming conventions talk Notability guidelines talk Announcements and open tasks talk  → Cleanup listing talk  → Nominations for deletion talk  → New articles talk  → Requests talk Showcase Film Portal talk Fiction noticeboard talk
Project organization Coordinators talk Participants talk Project banner talk Project category talk
Departments Assessment talk Categorization talk Core talk Films based on books talk Future films talk Missing films talk Outreach talk Review talk Spotlight talk Wikipedia 0.7 talk
Task forces General topics Film awards talk Film festivals talk Filmmaking talk Genre War films talk National and regional Argentine cinema talk Australian cinema talk Baltic cinema talk British cinema talk Canadian cinema talk Chinese cinema talk French cinema talk German cinema talk Indian cinema talk Italian cinema talk Japanese cinema talk Korean cinema talk New Zealand cinema talk Nordic cinema talk Persian cinema talk Southeast Asian cinema talk Soviet and post-Soviet cinema talk Spanish cinema talk
Templates banner DVD citation infobox plot cleanup stub userbox

Shortcuts: WP:FILMR WP:FILMREV

The review department of WikiProject Films is the project's main forum for conducting detailed reviews—both formal and informal—of particular articles and other content within its scope.

The department hosts two forms of review internal to the project:

• Peer review (an informal review meant to provide ideas for further improvement)
• A-Class review (a formal review of a candidate for an A-Class quality assessment)

It also provides a convenient collection of film-related content currently undergoing formal review outside the project:

Featured content reviews:

• Featured article candidates
• Featured article review
• Non-article featured content candidates

Peer review

Please add new requests below this line

Meet the Parents

I started working on this article when it looked like this. Over the last five months and practically singlehandedly, I've expanded it to what it is today. I've yet to write a GA or an FA and I've decided to make this my first one of those but I would appreciate some help from editors more qualified than myself to tell me what looks good and what needs improvement. In its current state, I believe the article qualifies as a class B but, again, input would be appreciated.

Thank you! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre

I've listed this article for peer review because it is a former FA candidate and I would like to see it reach FA status as soon as possible. I know there is some work to be done on the article, such as expanding the legacy section, reception and possibly creation of the film, as it's one of the most important horror films of all time. I am also open to any other suggestions for improving this article.

Thanks, --EclipseSSD (talk) 17:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

Article () • Article talk () • Watch peer review

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get input before taking it to FAC in the future. This is only the second film article I've extensively worked on, so if someone sees something missing, tell me. I know the 'cast' section hasn't been completed, but if people could look over my prose that would be great too.

Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Really like the article. I'd just suggest reducing the use of the words "positive" and "negative"; a thesaurus should yield a variety of synonyms appropriate for one place or another. LL&P Fg2 (talk) 12:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I found these phrases odd: "which moved Spock's death further in the story"; "Reliant's engine nacelle's destruction"; "Complaints about the film focus on what was seen as the tepid battle sequences"; "focused on what critics felt was aged acting by the stars". DrKiernan (talk) 09:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

What exactly do you find odd about them? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 12:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Prose-wise. "The destruction of the Reliant's engine nacelle" is easier to read than the double possessive. Similarly: "which moved Spock's death earlier in the story"; "Complaints about the film focus on battle sequences that were seen as tepid, and the age of the performers." DrKiernan (talk) 12:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I made modifications to the above phrases. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I found this to be generally quite well done, although I agree there are some places where the language could be smoothed a bit, as well as some places in Cast that need to expanded (Uhura). Here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

• Some references seem to be overused - for example in the William Shatner as James T. Kirk section, ref [3] is used three times in one paragraph without any direct quotes or intervening other refs. I think as long as everything in the paragraph can be attributed to the same source, one ref at the very end of the paragraph is fine.
• Revealing my geekiness here - I recall seeing this film and thought it odd that Saavik (a female) is referred to as "Mr. Saavik", but later learned this is the proper address for a naval lieutenant - could this fit into the naval themes? I also thought it odd that Amazing Grace was played on the bagpipes for Spock's funeral - any commentary on this?
• Problem sentence? should Besch and Shatner be possessive forms? Meyer stated that what he physically liked about Butrick was that his hair was blond like Besch['s ?] ([who played] the character's mother) but also curly like Shatner['s ?], making ...
• Unclear whether the worldwide total includes the US total in Star Trek II grossed $78,912,963 in the U.S. and $97,000,000 worldwide.
• Date linking is now generally deprecated but the dates in refs are all linked

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I was wondering about the 'Mr.' nomenclature too when watching, but there's no discussion about such specific themes in the special features or refs I've seen (ditto on the bagpipes, unfortunately, but I'll double check.) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 19:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The article discusses Spock's death a lot and I think it should go in the lead, considering it is the start of the story arc ending in The Voyage Home? I know we maintain a fine line between courtesy and common sense on the readers' part, but what's the use of not mentioning such a famous cliffhanger? Alientraveller (talk) 15:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not leaving it out as a spoiler; I just didn't think it was that big a deal. It's not really a cliffhanger, per say. If you think it's important I will try and add it in. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, now that's sorted, I recommend:

• Adding a few pictures, especially since I haven't seen the film in a while and therefore do not understand: "A scene taking place at Starfleet Academy, for example, used scenery in the foreground to give the sense of a larger set than was created. Instead of having operational elevators, walls were wheeled out of position while the lift doors were closed to give the illusion of moving between decks." Are we talking about forced perspective, or could you just show us this bit?
• The themes like aging (a little bit is in the cast section) and vengeance? I looked at the Memory Alpha page and there's great quotes which I hope are on the DVD.
• Who created the Kobiyashi-maru test?

Alientraveller (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I could add a 'Themes' section using Meyer's commentary (I know some of the quotes were definitely on the DVD, others I'm not sure.) I'm 90% certain the Kobiyashi Maru test's creator is not noted, but I'll double check the text and audio commentary. Forced perspective is what we're talking about, so I'll link to that. I'll try to make the lift think clearer, because an image wouldn't really illustrate it that well either. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Started the section. I think more or less it has what we need, although I found a possible good source for the life/death part that I have to get off Interlibrary Loan. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 22:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Batman Returns

Article () • Article talk () • Watch peer review

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

I've listed this article for peer review because I need other feedback to get this to FA-status. I still need to add Tim Burton's DVD audio commentary, but I'm open to other suggestions. More importantly I probably should expand the lead section.

Thanks, Wildroot (talk) 00:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

• The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself - my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
• Article needs a copyedit to clean up the language - an FA criterion is a professional level of English, but just in the lead there are problem sentences like Burton originally did not want to direct a sequel because of his mixed emotions of the previous film - "because of his mixed emotions of the previous film" is not grammatical, or ditto for "caused parental backlash controversy." in Batman Returns was released with financial and critical success, but caused parental backlash controversy. The top section of WP:PRV has people willing to help with copyedits.
• There are several places where the article needs to provide more context for the reader - for example in the Reaction subsection in the Reception section (Reaction is an odd name, by the way) there are many sentences like this Paul Dini enjoyed the characterization of Bruce Wayne. - while Paul Dini is wikilinked, there should also be a brief description of who he is - see WP:PCR A good example of this in the article is Batman comic book writer/artist Matt Wagner quoted, ... although "quoted" is an odd verb
• Refs should be in numerical so fix examples like Raquel Welch, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Lena Olin, Ellen Barkin, Cher, Bridget Fonda and Susan Sarandon were then in competition for the role.[11][3]
• A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - see Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Media for the FAs on films

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Juno (film)

Article () • Article talk () • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it has the potential to be a FA, but I think we could use some advice on clearing up defects in the article before proceeding with FAC.

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments from [SriMesh | talk 01:43, 21 September 2008 (UTC)]]

• Is the monetary amount $ American / $ Canadian dollar currency? $6.5 million - $60,016 - and etc...every time currency is mentioned

• The infobox image is [[Wikipedia:Non-free content}Non-free content]] add the template described on Non-free use rationale guideline on the actual image description page for your article. Do this for every non free image being used in articles. This image has an example...Image:Bhagavad-Gitas.JPG Better yet use public domain images. Put in a request.

• This entire section has no citations or references at all. Every fact needs a reference. Each paragraph should have 2 - 3 references minimum.

• The film appeared on many critics' top ten lists of the best films of 2007:

• Antifeminist --> Anti feminist screenwriting-->screen writing

• Antifeminism and screenwriting are both single words. —97198 (talk) 03:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• Wikifiy the word blog

• CDs should be spelled out the first time as compact discs and wikified abbreviation added in parenthesis if CD used again in article. And are they sound CDs or DVD CDs?

• catalog is american spelling catalogue is british be consistent throughout article

• Is cartoonized a word?

Thanks for the comments, I'll implement when I'm less tired. More comments, anyone?--Wehwalt (talk) 02:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • you've got a good Fair Use rationale for Image:Junoposter2007.jpg and all the other images are free use, but per WP:NFCC the fair use rationale must be explicitly stated for each article. Thus, swap the current template with {{Non-free use rationale}}. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
  • POV: remove or incorporate the top ten lists section, beef up reception. If you're not going to have any information about the cast besides the listing, why have it (it's in the infobox...) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 13:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)

• You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
  • What makes the following reliable sources?
    • http://www.comingsoon.net/
    • http://www.movieweb.com/
    • http://www.flipsidemovies.com/
    • http://baltimore.metromix.com/music/article/big-screen-chemistry/287031/content
    • http://www.product-reviews.net/2007/09/12/juno-soundtrack-best-soundtrack-of-the-year/
    • http://www.ioncinema.com/
    • http://www.slashfilm.com/
  • Per the MOS, link titles shouldn't be in all capitals.
    • http://mmbase.submarinechannel.com/titlesequences/index.jsp
    • http://www.socialmediaready.com/2008/01/27/great-movie-marketing-and-a-hamburger-phone-from-juno/
  • Current ref 81 is lacking a last access date.
  • Current ref 82 is a dead link? Need to fix if so.

Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 13:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Miller's Crossing

I am requesting this peer review in order to solicit opinions from the project about the cast section of the article, the content of which has been the subject of a dispute for some time now. I feel that the current "in-world" descriptions of the characters is inappropriate, unencyclopaedic, and misleading. I would like to hear the opinion of people involved in editing other film articles so that this matter can be settled. In general, this is a decent film article, but is in need of polishing. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I guess I'll start, since I was the one who first added character descriptions. I'd like to get some sort of consensus or final ruling on whether "in world" character descriptions are allowed in Cast sections. Various featured articles have "in world" character info in them, including E.T., Jurassic Park, Latter Days, and Kung Fu Hustle, so I thought that it would be acceptable in Miller's Crossing. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 23:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Office Space

I been cleaning up this article quite a bit and feel that it is at least ready to be upgraded to B status but would like any comments, suggestions and/or help to upgrade this popular cult comedy to GA status. Thanks.--J.D. (talk) 19:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review

Batman (1989 film)

I'm nominating this article because I think A-class status is a safe process to get to featured article nomination. This article has recently gone through a peer review and I think it's "ready". Comments are welcomed to make this article better. Wildroot (talk) 21:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

List of Macedonian submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film

This list is currently too short to pass at WP:FLC, so I'd like to get it to A-class as a form of recognition. I realize that we haven't had lists before for WP:FILM, but I know other projects (namely WP:VG from the top of my head) accept lists at A-class review. Again, as this list cannot pass FLC period, A-class is basically as far as it can go. Cheers, sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 08:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

While I certainly have no objections supporting, I'm not convinced that this isn't FL-able. One comment on the FLC does not a judgement make. Surely a six-entry list is sufficient, if done appropriately. (And of course, there's no reason why it won't continue to grow naturally over time.) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 09:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The relative minimum of ten entries has been discussed at length at WT:FLC (see Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates/Archive 3#Size of lists, Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates/Archive 3#Nominations of lists with small scopes, and Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates/Archive 2#Length), and is probably not going to change in the future. The big question is whether a small list can be representative of Wikipedia's "best work". The list can be comprehensive, sourced, well-written, and stable, but there comes a line in which we have to consider whether this is our "best work" that we want to be showcasing. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 22:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Support. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 01:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment Milčo Mančevski is wikilinked twice in the table. With the present sorname template, I didn't know how best it needs to be handled. You might want to unlink one. Mspraveen (talk) 15:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I know that the overlinking is bad, but I don't think there's a way to use the sortname template without having a link present. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 17:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Note - in light of the recent reversal of the Indonesian FLC, and since it was only mentioned briefly in this article's last FLC, I think that this stands a reasonable chance at still attaining FL-status. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 19:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

No, I only submitted the Indonesian submission list because it had more than ten items. The Macedonian list would still not pass at FLC. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Rang De Basanti

Considered a highly influential film in the Indian society, this article underwent a successful GA nomination recently. Thereafter I've made a lot of edits to increase its comprehensiveness. However, I would vastly gain from insights provided by external experienced editors. After considering and implementing your valuable comments and suggestions, I would like to make its best pitch at FAC. Thanking you in advance! Mspraveen (talk) 05:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
:I'd suggest that you move this review to A-class review instead, since this is already at GA. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. Please excuse me for my ignorance, but I hope taking it to the A-class review doesn't limit it to being an A-class article alone. Instead I was hoping, with the constructive criticism of the article, to take it to FAC. Mspraveen (talk) 12:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

No, they aren't mutually exclusive - it's just the next step between GA and FA. Peer review is for sub-GA articles. You can find the instructions on how to do this at the link I placed above. See you there? :) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 12:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Very minor point for editing purposes, since aircraft are integral to the plot, all uses of the word "plane" are usually deprecated and the word: "aircraft" is substituted because the "plane" is derived from "planing tool" as well as being a colloquialism of "aeroplane" and "airplane." FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC).

Thanks Bzuk, for your edits to improve it further! :) Mspraveen (talk) 06:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments by PC78

I'll get the ball rolling with this one... :)

• Film poster. Per guidelines at MOS:FILM, the film poster image should be reduced to a width of 300px.

Though I've added a width parameter in the infobox, I don't quite see much change in the width. I don't know if that is normal. Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant the actual image itself, not as it is used in the infobox. It's a simple enough task, though, so I'll take care of it myself. PC78 (talk) 17:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Mspraveen (talk) 06:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Infobox. The Indian flag in the infobox is rather unnecessary, and should be removed. Would it be appropriate to link "UTV Motion Pictures" to UTV Software Communications?

I've removed the Indian flag - I think that it shouldn't be here as well. Thanks for pointing that out :) And yes, I've linked "UTV Motion Pictures" to UTV Software Communications. Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Lead. The paragraph beginning "Based on accounts taken from..." is confusing. It's not immediately apparent that this is a recap of the plot. On first reading it appears as if the film itself is based on diary entries.

Oops, that's why I like a second opinion! I've reworded the paragraph now. I hope it is okay now. Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Better. PC78 (talk) 17:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Cast: This section is somewhat redundant, as actor names are given in parenthesis in the plot summary; alternatively, you could remove the actor names from the plot section.

Removed the redundant cast section now. Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Film quote. How is the quote in the "Production" section relevant? How is the screenshot essential in the reader's understanding of the quote? If retained, the screenshot should also be cropped and reduced in size.

I need advise here. Let me explain: The quote is depicted because 1) the dialogues brought the writer an award nomination 2) it is one central theme of the movie that summarizes the transformation of the youngsters. The screenshot, captured at the time of the quote delivery, provides information on the key cast. This screenshot may be removed as it is non-free. Already two effective (poster and a visual collage on the social influence) ones are used. However because of the mentioned reasons, I hope the quote can be retained. Thoughts? Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Unless that quote itself has been discussed in external sources, then you might reasonably pick any line of dialogue from the script as an example. The article says little about the writer beyond mentioning the award nomination, and I think the themes of the film are already adequately covered. Personally I would remove it, but hopefully you will get some opinions from other people. PC78 (talk) 17:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I do appreciate your thoughts here. Maybe we decide on its fate after a few more opinions. Mspraveen (talk) 06:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Casting. Sentence beginning "After the auditioning, she was flown to Mumbai..." – who is the article referring to here? I assume it's Patten, but the previous sentence mentions two actresses, so it isn't clear.

Removed the ambiguity now. Thanks for pointing that out! Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Soundtrack. I'm not sure what to advise here, because this is something currently being debated by project members at WT:FILM. However, why is a seperate article required for what is essentially just an infobox and tracklisting? (And incidentally, what makes the India Project regard such a brief article as Start-Class?)

I come from India WP and it was purely oversight that caused me to wrongly assess the soundtrack article as "Start". I've corrected the mistake now. Now I could have added the tracks in the music section, but I felt that would appear silly because presently, the music subsection falls within the Production section. I didn't/couldn't think of any further ideas to have it within the article. Help on this would be appreciated too! Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Best leave it for now. As I say, project members are currently discussing the issue of soundtracks in film articles, so it remains to be seen what (if anything) will be decided. PC78 (talk) 17:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll wait until there is any consensus on this matter. Mspraveen (talk) 06:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• External links. The BBC review is cited in the article, so an additional link here is not necessary.

Removed it now. Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Those were the most immediate things I noticed, besides a few copyediting issues. But on the whole it's a very thorough and well-written article. PC78 (talk) 12:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments :) Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It'd be nice if you can also spot areas that need copyediting. :) Thanks for your assistance! Mspraveen (talk) 06:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Further thoughts anyone? Mspraveen (talk) 11:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Nehrams2020

This article was really interesting to read and is well-sourced throughout. I have listed multiple suggestions below (don't be overwhelmed, the majority are very simple fixes) and will be happy to take another look once they are addressed. If you have any questions about these, just place a comment underneath them. Good job so far, I believe the article is close to A-class. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Made on a budget of Rs. 25 crores..." I think that because this is the English Wikipedia, it may be beneficial to convert this to also dollars or Euros, since dollars are also mentioned in the article. Also the dollars should be converted to crores as well. I don't know the exact policy on this, but if you can find something that disallows it, then ignore this suggestion. If not, be sure to fix the other occurrences within the article.

I used crores primarily because the sources are based from India and crore is common usage here. Secondly, the usage of USD was again as the source and the context (earnings in USA) require usage in USD. I tried browsing the WP:FILMS and WP:MOS but couldn't gather much. Maybe Girolamo pitches in here. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm curious on what should be done here. I just think it would be less confusing for a reader who reads the whole article and have to bounce back and forth between two different currencies. But then you also have to take inflation into effect and I'm sure other factors. I'd definitely like to hear the opinion of other reviewers as well on this so that we can implement it into our MOS guidelines. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• "They gradually begin to realize that their own lives are not very different from the characters they portray on the screen and that the same state of affairs that once plagued the revolutionaries continues to torment the present generation." Why is there a reference after this statement? Plot sections don't usually need sources unless, say, this particular statement is open to interpretation.

I would need some help here too. For the first time in my film-related articles, I realized that an external source's text aptly summarized a particular phase in the plot. I could not come up with any better sentence structure to explain that. So I decided to use the sentence directly from the source and cite it. Is this to be avoided? Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

If it is word for word from the source, then I'd say something like "Critic stated that the plot shifted to the characters "gradually beginning to realize...". However if it is just a plot summary in the cite then I'd recommend taking another stab at it and trying again to rewrite the statement yourself. Give it a few tries, I'm sure you can come up with something. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Y Done I rewrote the same trying as much as possible not to change the essence of the previous sentence. I hope this would be acceptable. Mspraveen (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• "is killed when his fighter crashes." Should this be changed to "are killed when the flight lieutenant's fighter crashes"? I'm not sure who was flying the plane.

Changed to Ajay Singh Rathod (Madhavan), who is Sonia's fiancé and also a Flight Lieutenant in the Indian Air Force, is killed when his fighter crashes. I hope this makes it clear. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I thought that there were two characters. I either read it to fast or wasn't paying attention. Either way, it reads clearer as you have it set up now. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• In the production section change "(as Paint it Yellow) and Hindi.[8];" to "(as Paint it Yellow) and Hindi;[8]"

Y Done Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• As PC78 focused on the quote above, I too have some concerns about it. From what I can tell the quote infobox is only used in articles actually covering the movie quote, so I don't think that it is relevant to include here. If the screenshot is just showing the actors speaking the line, then it is not really that relevant for inclusion in the article (unless a notable source specifically commented on how the line was stated for example and the image illustrated that). In any case Image:DJ Karan RDB.jpg needs to be reduced in size with one of its dimensions not exceeding 300px (consider trimming the widescreen bars as well). If this line was very significant then I'd see no problem in mentioning it in the article, but as it is set up now, I don't think it to be necessary.

Since this seems to be of some concern, I've removed the infobox. As I said in reply to PC78, the quote depicted is the central theme of the plot. Since the quote was in Hindi, I am not able to secure a reliable source which commentates on it. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Mehra said that despite Khan being a acclaimed actor" "an acclaimed actor"

Y Done Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Madhavan, a well-known Tamil cinema actor, played the role of a fighter aircraft pilot, and thought that it was amazing to work with Aamir." If the word "amazing" was specifically used, then put quotations marks around it and add the inline citation directly after it. Otherwise, this may be seen as POV.

Y Done Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• The other films in this article all have the year directly after them, but there are a few that don't. I'd recommend making it uniform throughout by adding the years to those that are missing them.

Y Done for most, but for the films used in the Release section. I felt the use of year release to be redundant because these films that were co-nominated with Rang De Basanti were anyways from the same year as that of the film. Please correct me if I am mistaken here in its usage. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Aamir Khan, with his useful knowledge of Hindi and Urdu," I don't think "useful" is needed here.

Y Done removed Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "After expectations of its box-office success from the media" The hyphen is not needed for box office, unless that is common for English used in India. If so, then ignore this comment.

Y Done removed Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'd recommend adding another wikilink for MiG-21 in either the production section or the release section.

Y Done in the Release section Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Although the filmmakers had obtained No-Objection-Certificate..." I'm not familiar with this certificate, and it's possible others may not know about it is as well. Consider adding a brief description of what it is.

Y Done I created a new stub article for this terminology. I hope that this will reduce the text size of this film article. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "In 2006, it premiered in France with the Lyon Asiexpo Film Festival,[55] the Wisconsin Film Festival,[56] and the Morocco-based International Film Festival of Marrakech." The serial comma is used in this sentence. Since it is not used throughout the rest of the article, this occurrence should be removed so that the article is uniform throughout.

Y Done removed serial comma Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Out of the Rs. 10 crore (100 million) marketing campaign, Rs. 2 crore (20 million)..." If this is in dollars, be sure to add the sign right before 100 million and 20 million.

Y Done Everything is in Rupees. I've removed crores now and just have the currency in million. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "The soundtrack, first released commercially in early December 2005, met with good success." "Good success" seems redundant, consider rewording.

Y Done removed "good" Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Since Rahman's last musical success, Saathiya, was back in 2002, there were high from the media." I don't understand the last half of this sentence.

Oh well, User:Epbr123 has been lending me a good hand with copy editing this article. The sentence actually says: "Since Rahman's last musical success, Saathiya, was back in 2002, there were high expectations from the soundtrack in the media." - The word "expectations" got deleted accidentally. It is fixed now. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "was reportedly voted as the "Song of the year" for 2006..." "Song of the Year"; "but also two tracks were to be considered for an Academy Award nomination.", reword to "but two tracks were also considered for an Academy Award nomination."

Y Done reworded as per your suggestion Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Besides these, the producers joined hands..." Consider rewording "joined hands".

Y Done reworded to "collaborated" Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "In India, The Hindu reported that with..." "The Hindu" should be italicized.

Y Done Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "The DVD release broke sales records: sales was the highest selling title of its time, selling more than 70,000 copies in six months time." Reword to "The DVD release sold more than 70,000 copies in six months time, and as a result, the film was the highest selling title of its time. Also, add a wikilink for VCD in the next sentence.

Y Done Thanks for the suggestion. Fixed it the wikilink as well. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "A Rediff.com reviewer, while appreciating the music, cinematography, dialogues and art direction, thought that films like this can easily get into "preachiness"; this did not happen and Mehra could get his message across well." Reword to "A Rediff.com reviewer, while appreciating the music, cinematography, dialogues and art direction, wrote that films like Rang De Basanti can easily get into "preachiness", but believed Mehra got his message across while avoiding this."

Y Done reworded as per your suggestion. Thanks again. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "The review from the BBC gave it a five star rating..." Is this five out of five?

Y Done The sentence now says: "The review from the BBC gave it the highest possible five star rating ...". I hope this is alright and is not POV. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Despite these qualms and Mehra's belief that his film didn't stand..." "didn't -> did not" This also occurs a few sentences later, make sure to fix that one as well.

Y Done fixed both Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Nice use of "qualms" by the way. I need to start using that word in the articles I write... --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Music composer, A. R. Rahman performed several concerts..." Remove the comma.

Y Done Fixed this Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Besides this, it was nominated for the" Reword to "The film was also nominated for..."

Y Done Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• Image:RDB advertisements.jpg this needs to be reduced in size with one dimension at 300px or less.

Y Done

Thanks so much for the detailed review. I sincerely appreciate you taking out time in doing so. Should you have any concerns in my response, please feel free to let me know. Thanks once again. Mspraveen (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

So far, you did an excellent job in addressing the issues I raised. I'm sorry for leaving so many suggestions that are very simple fixes, but I do so so that editors can further improve their writing and catch these issues in the future (Plus, I think it makes me look like I did a more comprehensive review!). Anyway, good work, and keep working on the other issues. Once a few more editors have looked over the remaining issues and have done their copyedits, I'll take a final look to support it. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you once again. Well, I prefer longer reviews because at least that is a good way for preparing the article for the rigor of FAC :) The article has been copy edited by User:Epbr123 and I think it is in a better shape with the help of PC78 and your reviews. Any further reviews are welcome. Cheers! Mspraveen (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Featured article candidates

Featured article review

Felix the Cat

previous FAR (14:53, 9 October 2008)

Non-article featured content candidates

Archives

Peer review

• 2006
• 2007
• 2008

A-Class review

• 2008 (promoted/failed)