Talk:A Beautiful Planet

	Film portal 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 discussion 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.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Spaceflight Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight 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.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Advocacy and un-encyclopedic writing, all over the place.

The article (as of Feb 23 2019) is full of editorial comment peacocking the film, intepreting its message, and expanding on these interpretations. All in good faith, I am sure. I put multiple tags on the article, for tone, 'personal essay', and 'like an advertisment' (it's somewhere between that and 'fan site'; it doesn't sound commercial, but it's constantly aggrandizing).

Advocacy

As a first example, I'd give the only text I removed right now -- going out of its way to give the reader disaster prep advice, and claiming to know that this message is the film's -- even though unstated:

He says nothing about severe weather advisories, but the implied message is clear: if you live in a threatened area, don't ignore tropical cyclone warnings, be mindful of recommended precautions, and evacuate if you are ordered to do so.

Even if this were not wandering off the topic, this film, the advocacy is still aggresively unencyclopedic. Good care taken, anyway, to at least note what was intepretation, and not stated in the film.

More broadly, the article jumps beyond describing the film to retelling and interpreting it, expanding into an essay on the ISS, the Earth, climate change, and more, in a POV style stating and advocating the messages of the film -- as interpreted by the editors. This is especially the very long 'Content' section -- it looks probably too long, but I couldn't be sure how that will look when all these other problems are improved.

Maybe I should be clear that I have nothing at all against these ecological opinions; I'd probably share them -- it's not their content, it's that the advocacy is utterly out of place.

Peacocking

A Beautiful Planet is narrated by Jennifer Lawrence, the lead actress in the hit series of films, The Hunger Games, and one of the individuals included in the 2013 edition of Time magazine's list of 100 most influential people in the world.

All that's needed here is 'actress Jennifer Lawrence' (or 'actor'). Piles of information like this are right behind the link, and that's the place for it. We shouldn't peacock the subject of the article, let alone its narrator, let alone an unrelated 'hit series' of other films she's in. Even if we wanted to promote the film, relentless hype like this would often turn readers off, instead. But we really, really don't want to promote or praise the film.

Elsewhere, elements of the film are "striking," "dramatic," and "superlative."

Personal essay

and then she does what everyone seated in the IMAX theaters watching the film would probably do

This commentary would be great in a movie review, on some individual or publication's site. It's just not Wikipedia material; as the personal essay guideline explains.

If a bunch of this content comes from one editor, I'd urge them to use a page of their own, and go to town with their essay on this film.

I don't expect to have time to rewrite the article myself. I've tried to take some time now, writing this. I've tried to be helpful, not hurtful, but I'm sure if I had lots of time, I could do that better. As it is, excuse me, I'm falling asleep as I go. Thanks for reading. Ale And Quail (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personal tone and off topic

The article contains tone that may be construed to be personal - and also doesn't reflect the whole picture. For example the article previously stated that the documentary had grossed $25.7 million worldwide, however the documentary was only shown in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Russian/CIS. I have changed the article to reflect this. The article may also contain some off topic information, such as the long quote from Scott Kelly's book Endurance: A Year in Space, a Lifetime of Discovery. Cheesetoastie64 (talk) 01:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]