Talk:Serenity (2005 film)/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 06:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note, I'll be reviewing this article within the next seven days. Please do not edit war. Viriditas (talk) 06:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to have this review finished by late tomorrow. Viriditas (talk) 09:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Four non-free images in a film article? WP:FILMNFI needs to be looked at here. I'm going to flag this for review. Viriditas (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"It also won...It also won..."
- Lead prose needs cleanup. We want to summarize the article using engaging prose, not a litany of factoids. The narrative needs to focus on only the most important awards. Viriditas (talk) 05:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Elements found in lead are not found in the body, such as box office receipts. Lead needs serious cleanup in order to summarize, not to detail. Viriditas (talk) 23:51, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

Plot summary is ~826 words, which exceeds the recommended length by 126 words per WP:FILMPLOT.
"The disillusioned Operative tells Mal that the Alliance government has been weakened and that he will try his best for his former foe, but he cannot guarantee that it will not come after Mal and his crew."
- By "it" you mean the interplanetary parliament. It should say so. Viriditas (talk)

Cast

"Captain Malcolm Reynolds was named #18 in TV Guide's "25 Greatest Sci-fi Legends" list in 2004"
- What does this have to do with this 2005 film? We already have an article on Malcolm Reynolds. Viriditas (talk) 11:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings

Can anyone explain why this article has received an unusual number of low ratings regarding objectivity and completeness? Viriditas (talk) 06:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Production

Development section looks good, but it would make more sense (and it wouldcleanup the ref section) to merge Whedon (2005) inline as a citation and page number
One issue with the development section is the use of forum sources. While there is little doubt that this supports the statement that "actors Nathan Fillion and Adam Baldwin confirmed the deal on the official Firefly forum", in general, it is best to support such statements with secondary sources first, and then add links to the forums. Otherwise, this can be construed as original research. The statement "as did Whedon in several interviews" does not seem to be supported by the cited source.
"Typically, production of a movie would try to save money by not filming in Los Angeles, but Whedon insisted on staying local."
- Not exactly an extraordinary claim, but it does refer to the opinion of a BLP so I expect to see a source. Viriditas (talk) 02:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Whedon also mentions in the Serenity DVD commentary that Fox still owned the rights to the name "Firefly""
- Not supported by the cited source, but another unsourced claim attributed to a BLP. I would be happy to try and confirm this in the DVD commentary, if I can find it.
"Stunt coordinator Chad Stahelski, a student of Jeet Kune Do under Dan Inosanto, created a customized fighting style for Summer Glau to use in the film's fight scenes. It was a hybrid of Kung Fu, kickboxing and elements of ballet, all combined to create a "balletic" martial art."
- Another BLP claim that can't be verified due to a dead link. Viriditas (talk) 01:51, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The set for the failed colony, Miranda, was filmed on location at Diamond Ranch High School in Pomona, California."
- Not an appropriate use of a source. This is a blog pointing to RS. You need to cite the RS directly. Clearly, this article is not ready for GA at this time. Viriditas (talk) 01:54, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"On September 17, 2004, Whedon announced on the film's official website that shooting had been completed."
- This is unsourced. When we say that a BLP did something or has an opinion about something, I expect to see a source. Viriditas (talk) 01:57, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Renown comic book artist Bernie Wrightson, co-creator of Swamp Thing, contributed concept drawings for the Reavers."
- Removed the "renown" bit; obviously he's renown, otherwise he wouldn't have worked on the film. Also, there must be more to say about the work he did on the Reavers, and as I reader, I expect to know more. Viriditas (talk) 02:00, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Serenity costumes are influenced by Wild West style"
- This is linked to the American Old West (and that link appears twice in the same section) but the subject is actually about Western wear. Needs a rewrite. Viriditas (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The Japanese Katakana characters are also present around the universe, most obviously seen in the flowing script on River's desk screen at her school. A sticker with the Arabic word "الدحار" (ad-dHār) appears behind Jayne's head on a wall inside Serenity's bridge when the crew is discussing whether or not they should go to Miranda."
- Unsourced. Viriditas (talk) 02:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Is the Arabic supposed to mean something? Google Translate just gives a phonetic approximation. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Musical Score

"The acoustic guitar version of the "Ballad of Serenity" (from Firefly), which was used at the end of the film's credits, is absent from the soundtrack."
- Unsourced. The daughter article, Serenity (soundtrack), indicates that the citation should be Whedon, Serenity: Director's Commentary, Track 3 "Aboard Serenity", however, I cannot verify at this time. Viriditas (talk) 02:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Release

"Universal launched an unprecedented 3-stage campaign"
- Is this claim supported by the sources? Viriditas (talk) 02:44, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"the screening in Washington, D.C. sold out in a mere 22 minutes and the screening in Phoenix in only eight minutes."
- Is this detail important enough for inclusion? Sources are not acceptable. First links to a dead link on RT, the second links to a Slashdot entry. Viriditas (talk) 02:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The entire second paragraph concerning Australian audiences and the BFI in London is unsourced and could be OR. Viriditas (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"A browser plug-in allowed the viewer to see the opening of the film in full-screen broadcast quality (bandwidth permitting). The clip was removed a few weeks later."
- Unsourced, and probably not important. Viriditas (talk) 02:55, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The entire third paragraph in the marketing section is unsourced, with only a citation to the R. Tam sessions Viriditas (talk) 02:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Home media claims about DVD sales rank on Amazon is cited to a dead link. Stats like this should have good, solid links. Viriditas (talk) 03:01, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"However, other international territories may decide to release the 2nd disc as well."
- Out of date information. This is why we don't add time sensitive content. Viriditas (talk) 03:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"An "exclusive collector's tin" version of Serenity was released for the two disk edition by the EzyDVD chain of stores in Australia."
- Are there any reliable secondary sources conferring notability, or only EzyDVD? Viriditas (talk) 03:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"After the title key for Serenity was copied from a software player (as documented in Muslix64's doom9 forum thread) and posted on the internet as a riddle"
- Trivia ourced to a dead link on Slashdot and a dead link on hdtvblogger. Viriditas (talk)
"The pirated release was a 19.6 GB 1080p VC-1 .EVO file with 5.1 DDPlus encoded sound. Although many other releases soon followed after the discoveries in muslix64's thread, Serenity's marked the beginning of widespread HD DVD pirating."
- Unsourced fancruft. Viriditas (talk) 03:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any reliable secondary sources supporting the content in the charity screenings section, or just fan sources? Viriditas (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awards

Multiple unsourced entries, with mostly dead links where there are citations. Viriditas (talk) 03:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Themes and cultural allusions

"Malcolm Reynolds, the protagonist, shoots at least three unarmed people, even one that was surrendering. On the DVD director's commentary, Whedon stated that he included this scene as "a reaction to the Greedo incident in Star Wars."
- Unsourced, unimportant trivia removed. Calling it "cultural allusions" in the heading isn't a free pass for trivia. I left the allusion to Mr. Sparkle in the article because this is important as a plot point. Viriditas (talk) 10:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel possibilities

I've seen some fancruft in my time, but this takes the cake. I suppose it could be preserved with citations to only the most reliable sources and cut down to half its size, but this is too much. We don't write encyclopedia articles about rumors, and one can easily summarize. Viriditas (talk) 10:55, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

Checklinks: 14 dead links
- Please fix this. Viriditas (talk) 00:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Lead prose needs cleanup and focus on only significant summary points

Based on the content, the lead does not adequately summarize the article, i.e. themes

Plot summary is slightly excessive.

Trivia in at least two sections
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
14 dead refs.

One unsourced claim in the development section

Three unsourced claims attributed to BLP's in the filming section

One unsourced claim about design aesthetics

One unsourced claim in the musical score section

Use of blog pointing to RS instead of citing the RS directly

Reliance on forum cites without secondary source reports also covering it could be interpreted as OR, although I see it more as a reliance on primary sources

Release section contains four bad sources (one non-existent, three unreliable) and enough unsourced information about Australia and UK to resemble OR. Third paragraph in marketing is entirely unsourced, but cited to the R. Tam sessions, which isn't good enough
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Cast section contains unnecessary detail

Release section contains unnecessary detail about the speed of ticket sales and numerous screenings
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Stable, but reverts have occurred. I would caution editors to refrain from any edit warring.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Four non-free images is excessive. Use must meet WP:FILMNFI. For more info see this comment on the project page.

NFCC needs updating; either weak or unmet.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I'm putting this on hold for seven days in order for the issues listed above to be addressed. If anyone needs more time, just ask. Otherwise, I will eventually fail it.Viriditas (talk) 10:57, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No action in seven days, so I'm failing this. Please address the above issues and nominate it again. Viriditas (talk) 11:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]