Wikipedia:Peer review/The King's Speech/archive1

The King's Speech[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am interested in making this article FA status.

Thanks, Guy546^(Talk) 03:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article. I have seen and enjoyed the film, and here are some suggestions for improvement.

A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many FAs on films at Category:FA-Class film articles.
The most difficult criterion for most articles to meet at FAC is 1a, a professional level of English. The writing here is good, but there are some rough spots. I will try to point these out, though I will not be able to show all of them here..

Agree entirely, I'm going to print if off and read over the weekend. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In general. avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs as these interrupt the narrative flow. The Awards and nominations section has a lot of these and they should be combined or perhaps expanded.

Yes, it seems like a list in prose. I'll try to find a synthetical source or else make it a bit more exciting. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Awkward sentence - perhaps split it into two Seidler began researching George VI's life after overcoming his own stammer during his youth, and started writing about the men's relationship as early as the 1980s, but postponed work at the Queen Mother's wishes until her death in 2002 Fixed. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC) *I would make sure if something is linked in the body of the article it is also linked in the lead - Elland Road is the example I noticed. Linked--Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC) *Problem sentence Principal photography took place on location in London and around Britain, including the opening scenes in Elland Stadium, Leeds, (for the since demolished Wembley Stadium), Lancaster House (Buckingham Palace interiors), and Ely Cathedral for Westminster Abbey, in December 2009 and January 2010. The article says filming ran from Nov to Jan., not Dec to Jan. I would also move the time frame earlier in the sentence (after "around Britain"). Agree with both, para has been rewritten. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid links that go to other sections within the article - box office in the lead, for example.

Hmmm, any particular reason? I'm neither hard for or against but I think it could be useful to certain readers. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*MOS says once a person's full name is used, just to use the last name afterwards (unless there are two or more people with the same last name). So once Geoffrey Rush's name is spelled out in the lead, he should just be Rush in the rest of the lead. It is Ok to use the full name on first use in the body, then last name only. Right you are, I've changed the case you mention. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the parentheses formula for winners of awards Best Director (Hooper)

Me too, ;)--Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Avoid similar constructions in a short space - three sentences in one paragraph opf the lead start with "The film..." *Plot synopsis (could this just be "Plot"?) seems a bit long / overly detailed Cut some details, still more flab. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC) *The article uses {{cquote}} but according the documentation at Template:Cquote this is for pull quotes only, and this should probably use {{blockquote}} or box quotes instead. Someone changed this a while ago, didn't feel like a fight. Changed back to lovely box. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC) *Paragraph on Academy Awards needs a ref. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. Good rule of thumb, but shouldn't be applied to harshly, that info is verified in the list and not controversial. Though a link has been added.--Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Refs need to provide consistent information. For example, internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V

This info is there for the most part, there are always some oversights though. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*What makes this a reliable source? http://www.flickr.com/photos/greenwood100/sets/72157622887893230/ See WP:RS Deleted. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

Not that I'm aware of, and I've written text in every paragraph of this article. --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:20, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, Ruhrfisch. They are useful and confirm thins I've felt for a while but didn't want to admit! I'll go through ecah item in the next few days. How would you assess the overral quality of the article? Best,--Ktlynch (talk) 13:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely GA, close to FA, but not quite there yet. FAC wants every i dotted and every t crossed - look at a few recent FAs for ideas on what issues arise. I think this owuld benefit from a light copyedit or waiting a while and reading the article out loud slowly - either way the prose would be polished. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, A-Class then, ;) ? Thanks again for the review. Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have an opinion on the unresolved dispute regarding the conversion of revenues to British Sterling? That would be really useful. Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 20:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]