Talk:You Are the Apple of My Eye

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article You Are the Apple of My Eye has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Film (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Chinese cinema task force.
 
WikiProject Taiwan (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copyedited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 13 July 2012. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.
 

C-class review[edit]

I have passed the article at C level. The article has sufficient coverage and reasonable depth, and no major sourcing issues that stand in the way of a C class assessment.

A few recommendations:

  • You don't need to cite every sentence, unless of course the paragraph has sentences that come from different sources. If a paragraph or section just uses the one source only, then you only need to give it one. If you over-cite it can become to messy for the reader.
  • The critical reception section isn't completely neutral. All the reviews are favorable, and you should really include a negative review by someone who didn't like the film to offer a counterpoint to the praise the film has received.
  • Generally, consensus on the film project is to not include an image in the soundtrack section, since it is not needed to identify the subject. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(film)#Soundtrack. It might be more productive to include a 30 second audio sample from the score instead to give readers a better understanding of the style of music used in the film. Betty Logan (talk) 11:28, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

Toolbox

See WP:DEADREF
for dead URLs

This review is transcluded from Talk:You Are the Apple of My Eye/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 08:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I'll take this. Note that I do not speak Mandarin, so I will be unable to provide a thorough source check (i.e. no spotchecks here) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Checklist[edit]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct. See below
1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Within definition
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content. Fine, but see note
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Fine
7. Overall assessment. Pending

Comments[edit]

1
  • Plot is jolty and doesn't flow very well. Perhaps consolidate similarly-themed parts into larger paragraphs. The third and fourth paragraphs stick out the most. -tried my best to improve it. However, the plot of the film itself jumps between the two scenes, so I really do not know how to fix this problem. Some help, perhaps?
  • with her strength or his? -done
  • Who's Ah-he? What does his dating Chia-yi have to do with the plot? -Removed
  • Any reason why Chia-yi does poorly on her exams? - added in
  • "saying that he did it to impress ex-girlfriend (and the female protagonist) Shen Chia-yi." - Any way to work that parenthetical into the text? ", the inspiration for the female protagonist, perhaps?- done
  • (who plays lead female character, Shen Chia-yi) - Is this necessary? You indicate who she played above- removed
  • Mypaper - a bit about the publication would be nice (Singapore-based Mypaper or whatever) -done
  • Several further paragraphs are really short and could be merged. -can you specify which?
  • "It contains six vocals by various artists and nine accompanying soundtracks used in the film." - Unclear. Do you mean it had six songs with vocals and nine instrumental pieces? -done
  • Really heavy on quotations (see WP:QUOTEFARM). This has copyright aspects as well. Should be cut back if possible.- Most quotes in the Production and Critical Reception section, so should be okay.
  • "Film Business Asia" - Should this be italicised? -done
  • (The previous record was set in 2003 by Infernal Affairs II, which earned HK$8,941,266.) - Might be good as a footnote (using {{efn}}, for example)- done
  • Same for (The record was previously held by the 2004 film Kung Fu Hustle.)- done
  • (which earned $390,000 in Singapore) - Not necessary, could be trimmed- done
  • I've given a copyedit, check the changes
3
  • Looks like you have issues with links dying on you. Suggest you use www.webcitation.org to archive them (at least your core references). I've done it on all my GAs and FAs. -see comments below
  • Fix the citation needed tag(s)- done for most. As for the one in the soundtrack section, it is really necessary to have one? It is already stated on the list, and in the album itself.
  • Just cite the album booklet (simple enough) -how exactly to do this?
  • Check your reference formatting. For example, the The Straits Times should be in italics for FN 42 and there is a double period in FN 26. -done
6
  • Preferable to remove the album cover, as it is essentially the same as the poster.- done — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Further discussion[edit]

  • On hold for one week. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for the review. I have made some changes to the article, though I would need more time to implement your suggestions. The really big headache I have, as you mentioned, is the dead links. I am not aware of the tool you mentioned, so thanks for the tip. However, I really am unable to find any archives that saved these deleted pages. In fact, I have fixed quite a lot of dead links before this GA review, though evidently not all. Can you suggest some alternative methods to solve this problem, given your past experience? --Lionratz (talk) 08:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Note to reviewer: I might be unable to spend large amounts of time in near future editing this page, since I have got exams coming up.
  • Did you try the Wayback Machine? It may help. (here) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Should have replaced all the broken links that the Checklinks tool highlighted. I have also added notes beside each point. Can you have a look at them?--Lionratz (talk) 13:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Replied above. Struck addressed comments — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:10, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Completed (I think) most of the tasks, with comments added beside each comment. Fixed the link too.--Lionratz (talk) 13:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Looks like you just have that When tag to deal with. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:01, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Done, I think...--Lionratz (talk) 04:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Okay. Thanks for the review!--Lionratz (talk) 02:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)