Jump to content

Talk:Jesus Is King (film)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Gerald Waldo Luis (talk · contribs) 12:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! This will be my first GAN review (and my first major stuff) since a few months of hiatus, so this will be interesting. Am happy to review this as a cinephile and an IMAX fan, though I would like to see this one someday. Do note that this is examination week for me, so I might be a bit slow on reviewing. GeraldWL 12:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis Thanks a lot for picking this one up, I will let you know that this is my first films GAN so I may be confused about certain points during the review and it is fine you might be going at a slow pace. --K. Peake 21:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis It's been over a month since this GAN was picked up; any updates as of November? --K. Peake 09:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for that, I didn't get any notifications so it pretty much went past my radar. I will look through this for a couple of hours, and will confirm to you back. Again, sorry for the month long delay! GeraldWL 10:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

[edit]
  • The alt text for the poster is kinda underwhelming. It should convey visually the image, to aid the visually impaired. In other words, what visual elements are in the poster that blind readers should know.
  • For the poster rationale, "Not replaceable with free media because" and "Respect for commercial opportunities" must be filled. Generally WP:FILM likes to just copy this.
  • The box office part doesn't need a ref, as it has already been covered in the "Box office" section.
  • "Featuring songs arranged by West in a gospel style"-- perhaps "Featuring gospel songs arranged by West" would be more direct?
  • "it served as a companion piece to the album"-- "it also served as a companion piece to the album"
  • "with the intention of bringing the Sunday Service Choir to life" just comes off as unencyclopedic. Judging by the Deadline title "Celebrating His Sunday Service", a more appropriate sentence would be "Intended as a tribute to the Sunday Service Choir, Jesus Is King was shot in the summer of 2019 in Roden Crater of Arizona's Painted Desert."
  • "screenings sold out 24 cities"-- "screenings sold out in 24 cities"

Plot

[edit]
  • "The scenes of Jesus Is King"-- scenes of or scenes in?
  • "New Testament Book of Mark" can be easily trimmed to "Gospel of Mark" per the article's title.
  • "and the camera moves inside it" --> "and the camera zooms in it". "moves inside it" refers to a dolly shot, which is a filmmaking jargon for zooming in, and I think that by changing it we can establish a contrast from the previous shot, which is zooming out of the keyhole.
  • "The film concludes with a close-up shot of Kanye shirtless as he cradles his son Psalm West and sings "Use This Gospel" to him." To avoid inconsistency where Kanye is referred to as "West", I'd have this sentence also referring to Kanye as "West", then removing "West" in regards to Psalm's name. It's common practice in other articles.

Production

[edit]
  • "On September 27, 2019, Kanye West"-- you can leave out "Kanye" since it has been established who "West" is referring to in the plot sec.
  • "At the time, West's wife"-- change "West's" to "his" to avoid repetition.
  • Decapitalize "Stories" in "Instagram Stories", as the capitalization is only meant for branding, whereas the product isn't capsed.
  • "release of the concert film Jesus Is King to accompany the album of the same name" --> "release of a concert film of the same name to accompany the album and as a tribute to the Sunday Service Choir"
  • Hmm Kyle Peake, I would agree with you in a general sense, but the problem is that the PR's quote is too encyclopedically vague and promotional. As I have stated earlier, "bringing them to life" will be taken literally by readers when reading encyclopedias, and so different people might have different interpretations on what it would mean. Even though there is only one meaning.
Altering it in the lead is not enough, since some readers may skip the lead and into the part they want to read on. Perhaps it's the production section, then they'll stumble upon that quote. In contrasts, flattering quotes like "presented in the immersive sound and stunning clarity of IMAX" are still acceptable, since they provide accurate information and do not potentially deceive readers. GeraldWL 16:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and brings the Sunday Service Choir "to life in the Roden Crater, visionary artist James Turrell's never-before-seen installation in Arizona's Painted Desert"" --> "at Roden Crater, its core modified by artist James Turrell to feature a naked-eye observatory, located in Arizona's Painted Desert." You can use this as source for "its core modified by artist James Turrell to feature a naked-eye observatory".
  • "and music from Jesus Is King" --> "and music from the album". I suggest referring to the album as "the album" to avoid confusion with the similarly-titled film.
  • I've made a draft here that breaks paragraph 1 into two, dividing statements about the film and songs featured, so readers can navigate easier. Let me know what you think.
  • Link zen.
  • ""extremely complex and extremely passionate about their lives", "extremely honest and sincere", and "often misunderstood""-- repetitive use of extremelys here. I'd suggest paraphrasing it: "intricate, spirited, kind, and oftentimes misrepresented"
  • Starting from "Jesus Is King served as a companion piece to the album", I think you can break it to a new paragraph as it is a whole new topic.

Marketing, release, box office

[edit]
  • You can remove the Instagram link here, since it's already linked previously.
  • Change the link in "behind-the-scenes" to behind-the-scenes; the name of the article has recently changed.
  • "West and his crew" --> "He and his crew"
  • "This is followed by footage of West in an editing room reciting the Mark quote and Turrell also makes an appearance in the trailer, speaking with the rapper." Perhaps a new sentence should be made for the Turrell statement?
  • "In June 2020, West tweeted an announcement of a digital release of the film on Apple Music." This should be inaccurate-- it's iTunes who distributes films, not Apple Music.
  • If you're gonna start the box office section with US$, should also put US$ in the lead and infobox for consistency.
  • "US locations New York" reads off unnaturally and kinda awkward. Suggest "US locations like New York"; also the same for the intl' part.

Critical response

[edit]
  • "At" Metacritic or "On" Metacritic?
  • You frequently cite references multiple times here: ref 44 at sentence 1, then ref 44 at sentence 2, and so on. It's much cleaner if you just cite it once, as there's no need for you to do like the status quo.
  • Kyle Peake, Nope, this is not required. WP:WHYCITE did say "Sources are also required when quoting someone", but did not specify that one reference should be cited each time there's a sentence with a quote from there. Also a lot of FAs don't cite every single sentence. GeraldWL 15:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
     Done --K. Peake 16:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Roden Crater location, and the different set-ups" --> "the diverse production design"
  • "Ehlrich noted" --> "He noted"; since his name was just mentioned a sentence ago repeating it would be, well, repetitive. Same thing for the other critics' parts.
  • I find it interesting that Gilchrist and Ehlrich thinks the same way regarding the runtime; maybe there's a way we can combine them? I know GAs aren't scrutinized to follow WP:RECEPTION, but I just think it's interesting.
  • "of West's Adidas Yeezy line." I don't understand this part.
  • I think that part of my confusion lies with the sentence as a whole: "as well as highlighting the minimalism that creates "holy wows" and the mixture of "ancient spiritual signifiers" with "the earth tones and graphical shapes" of West's Adidas Yeezy line." There's too many unencyclopedic quotes and could use some paraphrasing. Also "line" could be changed to "clothing line".
     Done if this looks better now? --K. Peake 16:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "finalizing that the film"-- finalizing seems like an off word choice here. I'd say concluding makes more sense.

Other stuff

[edit]
  • Copyvio checker finds no problems, only detected quotes and some generic phrases.
  • Reliable sources with appropriate ref layout. Can't find any original research
  • No edit wars I can see.

Overall

[edit]

Kyle Peake, so far the article seems up and ready for GA, with only two issues left. First, my point 3 in "Reception" isn't addressed fully, in that the mentions of the critics are still repetitive. It was only addressed for the Ehlrich part. And second, I'm still questioning some of the usage of many citations in a single claim. This is prevalent in the "Marketing" section, with a sentence as simple as a Biblical quote having up to four refs. I think that qualifies as an overkill in cites. If these issues are resolved, kindly ping me, and I'll pass this for GA :-) again I do apologize for the delay. GeraldWL 16:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis I have fixed the repetitiveness in reception and resolved citation overkill; the only times with 4 in a row now are where they are needed to back up all of the info! --K. Peake 21:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have made a final set of copyedits; you can go look at the summaries in the edit history. Otherwise, I think it's all good to go! Promoting~ GeraldWL 15:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jesus_Is_King_(film)/GA1&oldid=1120005671"