Talk:Oriental Film/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Seattle (talk · contribs) 16:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this soon. Seattle (talk) 16:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Biran, Misbach Yusa, ed. (1979) needs a language parameter
- Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Files check out in terms of copyright

Starring Njoo's wife Fifi Young, I'm not familiar with naming variations per country but per WP:SURNAME he should be "Seng"; he's Chinese and that's not an exception at the aforementioned page.
- Njoo is the family name. In Chinese names, including in the Indies in the early 20th century, the surname came first, then the generational name, then the given name. Hence The Teng Chun's brothers were The Teng Gan and The Teng Hwi (among others). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, that's listed at Category:Hatnote templates for names. OK. Seattle (talk) 01:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
worked with the Miss Riboet's Orion before can you add "theatrical troupe" after "Miss Riboet's Orion" for context?
- I believe "dramatist" implies theatre, as does "started his own troupe", but I could use the alternative name "Orion Opera" if you think it needs to be clearer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, that would be contextual. Seattle (talk) 01:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any critical reviews for Kris Mataram?
- Will look in the archives. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Found one, and what high praise it is indeed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reference for note "D"?
- Yep, added. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This film, starring Dhalia and Soerip to star, not quite
- Obviously. Fixed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why were the films deliberately destroyed?
- to prevent further warehouse fires in a controlled manner. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Think about fighting wildfires: they start new ones they can (more or less) control to prevent an unmanageable fire from coming up later on. Same principle. Indonesians have historically not cared much about documentation (if you can read the language, Biran's memoire Kenangan Orang Bandel has discussion of how he was ridiculed when he wanted to start up Sinematek Indonesia. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - OK, that makes sense. Seattle (talk) 01:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you can explain to me how Oriental Film is itself notable, that would be great. WP:INHERITORG states that "an organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it"; please explain.
- Well, aside from the significant coverage of the company itself (Biran dedicates three pages, and has further content scattered through his book), all of the films are notable (which is part of WP:AUTHOR, something I believe applies here as well: a company as a legal person as a creator of "... a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of ... multiple independent periodical articles or reviews."). The company wasn't an international juggernaut like Coca Cola, but it was significant throughout the colony, as evidenced by the reviews from Batavia to Surabaya. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - There are also articles in Pertjatoeran Doenia dan Film (a contemporary film magazine) about the end of Oriental, but I have not used them because Biran gives the same information. If you'd rather I cite those, that's fine, but since the magazine is so hard to come across (and Biran's book is much easier) I figure it helps our readers to cite Biran. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - I would prefer that you sprinkle in those references along with Biran, because I don't buy that a "dedicated" three pages equals notability (or that Wikipedia has promulgated a guideline similar to corporate personhood; the distinction between corporations and people is quite clear on Wikipedia.) I don't doubt that the various movies, actresses, and other affiliations are notable, but if that's the defense to the question of Oriental Film's notability, then you're misapplying the concept. Seattle (talk) 01:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - I've added two refs to Pertjatoeran Doenia dan Film and one to Sin Po; the latter goes into considerable detail about Oriental renting the ANIF studio and includes a picture. Despite the non-indicative name, it's entirely about Oriental. I can send you the scan if you want. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        That's fine. The link you provide goes to a blurb about Kris Mataram under the masthead Soerabaijasch Handelsblad, not Sin Po. That's the link in our article, too. Otherwise, I want to give some time to make sure that everything is accurate, because I can't read the language, and because some factual changes have occurred over the review. After that, I feel like this meets GA criteria. Seattle (talk) 11:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        Sorry, forgot to remove the link. That's done now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:08, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is everything OK on your end? Seattle (talk) 12:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah. Everything is okay here; I've double checked my sources and don't see any more changes needing to be made. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - OK. Passing. Seattle (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks again for reviewing! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Seattle (talk) 19:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]