Wikipedia:Peer review/Film colorization/archive1
Again, I've got a lot of great stuff in this article, I really like what's currently there, but I would, however, like some suggestions on improving it to FA status. Any help would be appreciated, muchas gracias. (Ibaranoff24 06:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC))
- Several things:
- Weak, short lead: per WP:LEAD and WP:WIAFA, the lead should provide a short overview of the article.
- The footnotes should be cited properly per WP:CITE- Template:Cite web might be useful here.
- Per WP:CONTEXT, only years with full dates should be linked.
- Citations: I would prefer if a few more citations were added. For example, The producers claim that their intention was to show the war literally in its true colors, without the air of unreality created by black and white film. should have a citation with it.
Thanks, AndyZ 18:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Markle & Hunt inventors:
- I agree with AndyZ about the Cite Web template. For example, it would be nice to credit the About.com author, Mary Bellis, and to indicate when you accessed the page to retrieve that info.
- The About.com article says 1983, the patent was applied for in 1986 and issued in 1991, this article says it was used in 1970! Need to sort out the dates.
- I'm not sure the statement "The technique was patented in 1991" is accurate. See previous point. Do you take the date the patent was applied for or when it was issued? Probably best to combine the whole invented and patented in one sentence - the current text reads as though the invention and patent might be for different things.
- The Restoration and Integration sections need references.