Wikipedia:Peer review/Sorcerer (film)/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Sorcerer (film)[edit]

(more info)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think I improved it considerably from Stub-class article to a comprehensively written one (and there will be a lot more to come in this respect), and I would like to get some creative feedback to see if my changes were adequate and what areas could be further improved, as well as if there are any errors and I'd like to receive some help in order to make references more complete (i.e. I have problems with citing the same book multiple times, but listing different pages in each reference)...

Thanks, Salt The Fries 86 (talk) 21:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments by NRP

You've done a good job with filling out this article. However, there are a few things that I'd suggest:

  • The intro is too long and detailed. It should provide a brief overview. I'd suggest moving those long quotations into Production.
  • The plot summary is too short. It should ideally be between 400 and 700 words.
  • The information on the title should probably be in Production. You might want to get a second opinion on that, because I can see a decent argument for keeping it where it is.

Finally, if you're looking for help on how to cite the same book multiple times, it's actually fairly easy: use template:RP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The article looks much better referenced now, but you've still got a bit of an original research problem in Influences. You have a source saying one thing, another source saying a different thing, and you're linking them together, using original research. This is called synthesis. Unless you can find a reliable source that links those two ideas together, you can't do it. You might also consider summarizing some of those lengthy quotations. For example, the quotations in the intro definitely need to be summarized or moved. Also, you may have a few too many sections. I think a few of them can be collapsed together. I'll see if I can help with that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:58, 25 May 2013 (UTC)