Jump to content

Talk:Simón (2023 film)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
Passed. simongraham (talk) 18:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 14:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How could I resist volunteering to undertake a review of an article so named! A cursory glance shows a well written article so I feel this will be an enjoyable review too. simongraham (talk) 14:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • The article is of reasonable length, with 1,368 words of readable prose.
  • The lead is a short length at 86 words and does not cover all the salient points in the article. Suggest adding one or two more sentences.
  • 87.3% of authorship is by NoonIcarus.
  • It is currently assessed as a C class article.
  • It was a DYK listed in September 2023
  • There is no evidence of edit wars.
  • The layout is consistent with the relevant Manuals of Style.
  • It covers the topic using a wide number of sources, mostly in Spanish, so I will AGF that it is sufficiently broad in coverage.
  • Earwig gives a 23.1% chance of copyright violation, which means it is unlikely. The top source is Sunshine State Cineplex due to a direct quote in the article from the site. The other top links are also review sites quoted in the article.
  • The text seems clear and neutral.
  • The infobox image seems relevant and has a fair use tag.
  • There is another image that has an appropriate PD tag.

Review

[edit]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
 Done. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See below. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Venezuelan cinema in the 2020s article created and added. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. I also removed a few duplicate links of Diego Vicentini --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Insert the word the in the phrase "so he imagined rats on Christian during the scene to evoke the desired emotions".
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a character inspired on Rufo Chacón" should read "a character inspired by Rufo Chacón".
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider removing the superfluous it in "and it was subsequently".
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the Production chronological? Can it be?
See below --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move the sentences "Simón is the director's debut feature film" and "Simón is Diego Vicentini's first feature film." Closer together and add context. For example, How did they know each other?
Working. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Moved the sentences and added a description for Marcel Rasquin. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move the sentence "The director commented that the film had a total of 18 versions of the script before choosing a final version" so that it flows in the narrative.
 Fixed Should be better now I think -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rewrite "Two days before its commercial release, it was reported that a complaint was filed against the film in Venezuela's Public Ministry to prevent it from being screened in theaters," to avoid the passive voice and ambiguous "it", e.g. "Two days before the film's commercial release, x report that…" (replacing x with a reputable and accredited source).
 Done Replaced with "Venezuelan outlets", can be more specific if needed. I'll try to explain more about it below. --NoonIcarus (talk) 02:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest placing the information on the critical reception together and that on awards following.
See below. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 17:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move the paragraphs "The Venezuelan Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences chose Simón to represent Venezuela in the 38th Goya Awards." And "On 30 November, Simón was officially nominated to the 38th Goya Awards in the Best Ibero-American Film category." closer together.
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The paragraph that starts "The film was not chosen as the country's candidate for the Academy Awards" requires rewriting to ensure it is clear and unbiased. For example, reword "Diego Vicentini stated that he was disappointed with the decision, arguing that the film had the merits to be a candidate and denounced irregularities during the selection process, declaring that he and his team received reports that part of the selection committee, traditionally made up of members of the Venezuelan filmmakers' guild, consisted of unknown persons this year" to be more encyclopaedic. Rephrase to remove the duplication of "in favor" in the following sentence. Remove any controversial statements or clarify them by source. For example, add a date to the final sentence and clarify the consequence of this statement.
Working. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Changed some of the wording, tried to include more neutral phrasing. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see no other obvious spelling or grammar errors.
  • The sources are a combination of reputable websites and review pages. Some of these are self-published. For example, Footnote 24 Is to a Youtube review on RottenTomatoes. Rottentomatoes is considered reputable as per WP:ROTTENTOMATOES but there are caveats. I suggest self-published items and similar social media productions do not meet WP:RS, and WP:SPS. Please replace them with reliable sources.
See below. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Was unable to find independent sources for footnote 24, removed it to be safe. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add a translated title for the sources in Spanish using trans-title (see, for example, footnote 14 from Correo del Caroní).
 Done I also added interlanguage links for Revista Ronda [es] and Unión Radio [es], and linked Diario La Verdad. As far as I know, the remaining red links in the refs don't have any articles in Spanish. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:15, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The links to Diario La Verdad, In Focus-Magazine and Observador Latino seem to be dead. There may be others as I have only sampled.
 Fixed Boldly removed In Focus mag source as I couldn't find the appropriate archived copy for it and it's substantiated by another ref. Archived the Diario and Observador sources,
  • Footnotes 2 and 8, and 5 and 9 are the same source. Please remove these and check the others for duplication.
 Done My mistake, it seems this was a mistake while I was copyiediting, I repeated the fact that it's a debut film, also mentioned above. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded simply as "Vicentini opted for the lead actor from the short film, Christian McGaffney". --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@NoonIcarus: Excellent work so far. Please ping me when you would like me to take another look. simongraham (talk) 02:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Simongraham: Hi! Thank you much again for taking the time to review the article. I think that most of the suggestions should be done now, so I guess that the first question that I have is if any of the points marked as "Done" need any further work. For example, the reports about the alleged complaint against the film are a little complicated, since the first outlet that published this deleted the article (and it should be mentioned that it's an outlet known for spreading misinformation too). The director released a video talking about the this in more detail. I have tackled the passive voice by saying "Venezuelan outlets", but I could try being more specific if needed.
Excellent work. I feel that works. simongraham (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have recommendations on which links about Cinema of Venezuela could be added? I would like to include Venezuelan cinema in the 2020s, but the article doesn't exist yet. I think that overall there are few related articles, such as Venezuelan cinema in the 1890s, Venezuelan cinema in the 1900s, National Cinematography Law and Bolivarian Revolution in film, and I want to be careful with WP:SYNTH in the last case. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Would you like to create that article? Feel free to add a red link if you are thinking of doing so. simongraham (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Production section is chronological for the most part: it first comments on the idea and funding of the project, while later dealing with the filming. I have moved some of the sentences, which can help with this, but I can tweak it further if needed. I also started rewording the paragraph about the Academy Awards nomination to address neutrality concerns, but I wanted to know if there were specific words to phrases that could be problematic.
That looks much better. I suggest checking the verbs and ensure that they are in the correct tense; for example "Vicentini continued", "Cottin, reaffirmed". simongraham (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Last but not least, regarding the Rotten Tomatoes video review, so far I have not been able to find independent or third sources about it, so I've thought about scrapping the sentence altogether. You can let me know what you think.
I think that seems reasonable. simongraham (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to fix the remaining points by today or tomorrow :) Best wishes! --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One last thing, sorry: I'm not sure if I understand the question about placing the information about critical reception together and that on awards following. In other words, would this be to merge both sections? Many thanks in advance. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For me, it is about making it easy for the reader. I think the changes you have made are good and help the flow. Please add years where helpful. simongraham (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@NoonIcarus: This is looking great. Keep up the good work. simongraham (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@NoonIcarus: Great work. I have made some amendments to the Reception section and expanded the lead. Please feel free to edit these. Otherwise, I think we are pretty much ready to promote the article to GA. simongraham (talk) 01:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham: Hi! I wanted to apologize because I was expecting to do the changes sooner, but I think that precisely the Reception section was the only remaining question that I had. Are there other improvements you would like me to make? Thank you so much for your help! --NoonIcarus (talk) 02:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@NoonIcarus: No problem. There is not much left. Rather than give a list of minor grammar issues, I have updated the document. Please take a look and see if you are happy with the changes. simongraham (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham: Thank you very much! I don't have any problem with the last changes, fixes to grammar issues is the help that I appreciate the most. --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@NoonIcarus: Not a problem. I believe this article meets the GA criteria. simongraham (talk) 18:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pass simongraham (talk) 18:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Simón_(2023_film)/GA1&oldid=1245211438"