Wikipedia:Peer review/GoldenEye/archive5

GoldenEye

Previous peer review

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has undergone extensive upgrading since last peer review. The article is in my opinion ready for FAC but I thought I'd make first a peer review as a neutral point of view to show what's missing.

Thanks, Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This generally reads well. I have a few suggestions for improvement.

• Recent changes to WP:MOSNUM deprecate the autoformatting of full dates. I ran a script to unlink the dates in this article and to render them in month-day-year (m-d-y) format to match the existing pattern in the main text. I see, however, that the date formatting pattern varies in the citations, and the script won't change these. It would be good to choose a single date format for the citations and use it throughout. I believe it's OK to use yyyy-mm-dd for all of these since most of them already appear in that format. This would give you a consistent formatting for the main text and a consistent (though different) one for the citations.
  • This depends on citation template. There should be a consistency between the templates.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 15:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

• The "Plot" and "Cast" sections cite no sources. My rule of thumb is to include a source for each paragraph, each statistic, each unusual claim, and each direct quotation. If you cite no sources for the plot summary or the casting list, your work looks like original research. Please see WP:NOR.
  • Plots don't require citations as I remember--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 15:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

• In some places in the article, blue links run together in a way that makes it hard for the reader to tell at a glance what is being linked. An example is Georgian lust murderer. I would try to break these up either by unlinking or re-casting. If you think it's important to link Georgia, you could rewrite in this way: "A lust murderer and Trevelyan's henchwoman. A sadist and masochist from Georgia... " Another of these blue overlaps is "New Zealander Martin Campbell", and another is "Arizona State University's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication", and I see others. It's best to avoid this kind of link bump.
  • I don't agree, as this is used throughout Wikipedia and is usually ok.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 15:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

• In the "Prelude" section, the sentence, "Also, in 1989, MGM/UA was sold to the Australian based broadcasting group Quintex, who wanted to merge the company with Pathé" has some errors that a copyeditor would probably catch and fix. "Quintex" is misspelled and should be "Qintex", and I'd suggest wikilinking it. "Australian-based" needs a hyphen. A company, Quintex, is a "which" rather than a "who". It would be good to find a fresh eye to look for little details like this to spiff up.

• Avoid Easter-egg links such as "in the new film" in the "Prelude" section. Easter-egg links take the reader to surprises rather than to pages that are chiefly about the linked terms. I would fix this particular one by removing the link.

• You need a source for the analysis of Bond's character.

I hope these brief comments prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 19:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Further Finetooth comment: Thinking about the lack of Plot and Cast sources some more got me to wondering if it's possible to find sources for detailed movie plots. I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure you could find a reliable source for any cast list. I looked at a few WP:FA articles about movies to see what other editors had done with plots and casts. Indeed, some have plot and cast sections with no sources. If I were the main contributor to any of these, I'd try hard to find sources and to rely as little as possible on my own observations and opinions about what the plot consists of. You might look at Halloween (1978 film) for ideas about how to improve the "Cast" section. Fun Home in the arts and literature FA list handles the plot questions in an interesting way, and it's well-sourced. Maybe these ideas or ideas from other FA articles could get help get your article up to FA. Finetooth (talk) 21:25, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Monowi: I'd like to try & help out by suggesting a few thing in the way of copyediting:

1. The second sentence of the lead section reads, "It was directed by Martin Campbell." This sentence is way too short. Perhaps you could tack its info on before the sentence about writer Michael France, so that the new sentence would read something like, "Directed by Martin Campbell, the film's story was conceived and written by Michael France, with later collaboration by other writers."

• • I combined the sentences--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 15:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

1. The sentence in the lead that reads, "The film was praised by most critics and performed well at the box office, considerably better than Dalton's films, without taking inflation into account." doesn't conform to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view even with the accompanying reference. My suggestion is to stick to concrete facts and figures. For example, instead of saying, "...performed well at the box office...", just state its exact total gross. A sentence like, "The film accumulated a worldwide gross of $350.7 million...."
2. For average Wikipedia readers, it would be best to type out BAFTA's abbreviation. Consider a sentence that reads like, "The film also received award nominations for "Best Achievement in Special Effects" and "Best Sound" from the British Academy of Film and Television Arts."
3. Scanning through the article, there are multiple instances of paragraphs that consist of less than three sentence, such as in the "Effects" and "Music" sections. In general, paragraphs typically consist of three sentences or more, so definitely try to remedy that before the article's next FAC nomination.

I'll try to add additional specific comments later, but I hope these help for now. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 07:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Trupial: Regarding the suggestion that plot summaries should cite sources, this is frequently impossible; there are no published sources of detailed plot summaries for most movies. WikiProject_Films/Style_guidelines says this: Plot summaries do not normally require citations; the film itself is the source, as the accuracy of the plot description can be verified by watching the film. Exceptions to this rule may apply to films containing plot details that are unclear or open to interpretation, in which case the various interpretations should be cited to reliable sources. Trupial (talk) 08:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)