Talk:Willow (1988 film)/GA1
Appearance
(Redirected from Talk:Willow (film)/GA1)
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- the cast section needs to be rewritten in prose. Perhaps also consider if you can find a way to do so for theu list in the sequels section.
- B. MoS compliance:
- some of major sections are missing, such as soundtrack,
reception, etc.
- some of major sections are missing, such as soundtrack,
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- The reception information should be moved to its own section
Done
- The reception information should be moved to its own section
- B. Focused:
plot section is too long
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- There is only the infobox cover; there are no screenshots to depict the film.
- Also, because of the claim in Visual effects, a short clip of some of the morphing may also be appropriate (since a screenshot would not easily suffice). Given that it is an important part of the creation and notability of the film, it may be a good idea to upload, though it would have to be in ogv format.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
The release section needs to be split. The reception, reviews and criticism should be in it's own section and information on the release itself should be in its own.
- Per WP:MOS, the Plot section is fine, and fairly short compared to the majority of film articles. Also, a soundtrack section is not mandatory. In addition, I fixed your concerns with the Reception. Wildroot (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Per Film Style Guidelines a section on the soundtrack is usually added. Given the level of coverage Willow has, I am certain there is imformation out there about the soundtack, enough to satisfy WP:V that it exists at the least, if not more.じんない 23:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I guess I just need to find a suitable photo,fix the Castand write about the Soundtrack. Good idea and suggestion. I will eventually get to that. Wildroot (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)- While that will go a long way (i really suggest you try and find, or ask someone for, a clip of the morphing scene at the wikiproject and explain that it is important to represent the impact of the work on development of the technology.
- However, the character list could use some tweaking still. Give some description what those characters are in the form of a sentence or two. See Casablanca for a good idea what I mean. And remove the red-linked name unless you plan to make an article in the future for that person.じんない 00:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know what you mean. Also, I was not trying to sound sarcastic with that previous comment. Sometimes I talk like that. Don't worry, I will get this handled eventually. Like tomorrow....or something. Wildroot (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- I fixed the general concerns. However, even if I try and ask other editors at the WikiProject talk page, I highly doubt anyone would offer assistance. Sorry. Let me know what you think. Wildroot (talk) 22:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well overall i think this article has come with a significant improvement. However, the lack of a soundtrack section is key because the information is out there and easily available. GA articles shouldn't be missing any relevant sections and a quick search on google has shown that there is a soundtrack out there.じんない 08:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- What? Sorry, but I added a Soundtrack section. It's right there in the article. I think Willow is ready for GA-status. Wildroot (talk) 21:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Add a cite for it and you'll be done. Try MusicBrainz if you can.じんない 21:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- I've added citations for the album section. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Add a cite for it and you'll be done. Try MusicBrainz if you can.じんない 21:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- What? Sorry, but I added a Soundtrack section. It's right there in the article. I think Willow is ready for GA-status. Wildroot (talk) 21:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well overall i think this article has come with a significant improvement. However, the lack of a soundtrack section is key because the information is out there and easily available. GA articles shouldn't be missing any relevant sections and a quick search on google has shown that there is a soundtrack out there.じんない 08:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- I fixed the general concerns. However, even if I try and ask other editors at the WikiProject talk page, I highly doubt anyone would offer assistance. Sorry. Let me know what you think. Wildroot (talk) 22:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know what you mean. Also, I was not trying to sound sarcastic with that previous comment. Sometimes I talk like that. Don't worry, I will get this handled eventually. Like tomorrow....or something. Wildroot (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Ebert, Siskel, Kael and?
[edit]I read on IMDB that the two-headed dragon was called the "Ebersisk" as a direct reference to Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel ([1]). Likewise, i assume that the evil general Kael was named after Pauline Kael. Are there any other film critics aimed at in this movie?--RCS (talk) 13:18, 21 March 2009 (UTC)