Talk:Ip Man 2/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 15:06, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to take this one, Kelvin; sorry you've had to wait a bit for a review. Comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. Best, Khazar2 (talk) 15:06, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've seen this film, but it's been a while, so I apologize if any of the comments below are dense. This article seems to be off to a good start. It seems reasonably comprehensive and the sourcing is thorough, though I still haven't checked the sources for reliability (I'm not familiar offhand with the Hong Kong publications). This does still seem to need some cleanup in terms of balance and level of detail at points; I've made specific suggestions below. I've also made some changes as I went, including a few cuts; feel free to revert any with which you disagree and we can discuss further. It doesn't look like you've made any edits to the article yourself yet, but thanks for being willing to take this one on. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:40, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Jip6 Man6 Ji6: Zung1 Si1 Zyun6 Kei4" -- I don't speak Cantonese, but this combination of letters and numbers strikes me as unusual. Can you verify that this is the correct way to write this? (this is right Done)

MOS:FILM suggests that plot summaries be limited to 400-700 words; this is about 1000. I'd suggest cutting it by at least a third to meet GA requirements for conciseness (see criterion 2b). You may find Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary helpful for this.

"This character is based on Wong Shun Leung." -- I'd suggest adding a phrase of context about who this is. Done

Providing simplified, traditional, and pinyin script translations for every character name seems like excessive detail to me, and not useful to most English-language readers. What would you think about moving these to Explanatory footnotes? That way, that level of detail is still available for readers who want a translation, but doesn't clutter this section. Done

"* Jean Favie as the judge who changes the rules of the match because Twister's manager told him to do it." -- we're getting into fairly trivial characters now; since this person doesn't even have a Wikipedia article, I'm not sure they're worth listing here. Done

It seems odd to say that "Jin attempts to retire from the martial arts world by ... befriending Ip". Wouldn't Ip be the worst possible friend to make if attempting to retire? I'm not sure I quite understand this sentence. Done

If Li Chak is important enough to include in the prose of the "casting" section, why is he not in the earlier cast list? (Same comment for Ashton Chen) Done

"solid martial arts foundation or looks" -- looks as in "good-looking", "looks like a martial artist", or "looks like Bruce Lee"?

"Yip narrowed the casting call down to two possible candidates: 10-year-old Jiang Dai Yan from Henan and 12-year-old Pan Run Kang from Heilongjiang" -- it seems trivial to say who the runner-up was to deliver a few lines of dialogue. I realize a cameo as Bruce Lee is a big deal, but it's still just a cameo.

"Other cast members include Ngo Ka-nin and Kelvin Cheng" -- are these people significant enough to mention in the prose? Who did they play, and what's important about them?

"is being viewed ... is being seen" -- is it the rivals who see the other discipline this way? Or everyone?

"Ip Man 3 (also known as Ip Man 3D) is a direct sequel to Ip Man 2 and is due to be released in 2013.[58]" -- IMDB is not a reliable source, and we're almost done with 2013. Can you update this section? Or is this just a hoax addition to the article?

I'll put this on hold to give you a chance to address the above, and then continue with the review. Let me know your thoughts, and thanks again, Khazar2 (talk) 18:40, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On further review, I'm concerned about the quality of sourcing beyond the IMDB issue I raised above; we all make mistakes, but having an entire section of an article be wrong is a pretty big blunder. But here are some other sources I'm not sure pass muster:

http://hktopten.blogspot.com/ is unlikely to be a reliable source.

Same for [wu-jing.org wu-jing.org], which identifies as a fan site.

China Internet Information Center appears to be a wiki, per its Wikipedia article, and therefore I'm skeptical that it qualifies as a reliable source.

is badassdigest.com a reliable source?

is insing.com a reliable source?

is http://cfensi.dramaddicts.com/ a reliable source? The link goes to a blog in a now-defunct forum.

Since this is a driveby nomination anyway, I'm going to close this review without listing this one for now. There's a lot of good information here, and I appreciate the work others have put into it to bring it this far. Before being ready for GA, though, I think it'll need some attention to clean up errors and improve the quality of sourcing. I hope someone will be interested in taking this fun film the rest of the way. Cheers and all best, Khazar2 (talk) 18:59, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an update, I did find some references to an Ip Man 3D in the works [1], so this information wasn't fictional, just badly out of date; it looks like the project never got funded and Yen and Yip pulled out. -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:05, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]