Wikipedia:Featured article review/Summer of '42/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by Casliber via FACBot (talk) 2:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC) [1].
- Notified: WikiProject Film, WikiProject United States
Review section
editI am nominating this featured article for review because it poses major problems primarily with regard to citation, sources, coverage, and prose which is far from the professional writing standard expected of FAs. The plot section—which has 914 words—is well over the 700 word required per WP:FILMPLOT, and isn't exactly well-written as there are some excessive scene-by-scene breakdowns, especially the opening paragraph. (Who in the world begins a plot summary with 'The film opens'?). The reception section is rather underdeveloped since it includes not a single review from critics (not even a report from Rotten Tomatoes!) which could back its claim of a "critically-acclaimed" production, and its theatrical run is not adequately reported. Finally, the sequels, soundtrack, and cultural impact sections have some unsourced statements, and two coverage are missing: a theme/analysis section, given the film's intriguing subject matter, and a home media section for its VHS, DVD, Blu-ray releases. I don't find this article's FA status particularly appetizing for these reasons and it's really unfortunate. Slightlymad 15:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
editWell, someone kindly added a Rotten Tomatoes review. Still needs trimming of plot and buffing of reception section Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delist—1a, 1b, and 1c issues per above. Plot section is overlong. Prose needs a massage (e.g. repeated uses of "the film" as a term, redundancies, etc.). I mean, look at snakes like this: "The film became a blockbuster upon its release, grossing over $32 million, making it the sixth highest-grossing film of 1971 and one of the most successful films in history, with an expense-to-profit ratio of 1:32;[8] beyond that, it is estimated video rentals and purchases in the United States since the 1980s have produced an additional $20.5 million.[9]" Needs work. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 16:24, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.