Talk:Who's Your Neighbor?

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Who's Your Neighbor?/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 21:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll review. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Passing infobox, "Cast".

Production

• Can you confirm Motography didn't goof on the spelling of Cruger? I'm seeing references to Kruger more than Cruger.

Motography is correct it appears. Mary Grace Quackenbos and I doubt the Smithsonian would make such a mistake either.[1] The choice of spelling (as of the time) was correct. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• You should wikilink in Mary Grace Quackenbos, Ms. Humiston.

Done. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• I would really love if there was a bit of context to the Cruger/Kruger mystery, for modern readers. I know it's not the main topic, but it would really help establish why the case was of interest.

It was already speculation on their part, not without good merit. But I could try and work it in. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• The first reference to the magazine should be where the wikilink is, not the second reference.

Thanks. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Premiers are politicians in parliamentary governments, films have premieres.

Both are correct, first in rank (Political Premier) and also earliest (as in showing) are both proper usages. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Any knowledge what a stage right basis means? I can't find anything on Google in a quick search. Or should I just think of Snagglepuss?

I really didn't know what it meant either. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Is H. D. Fretz the writer, or someone at Master Drama?

Fretz is credited, sometimes Master Drama and other companies would release the stories for the magazines as teasers or even advertisements for people to view the film. By 1917 this practice was in sharp decline as compared to the 1913-1914 period. I do not know if Fretz worked for Master Drama, but it seems unlikely as he was a reviewer. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• When Motoplay said it was breaking a record, is that the first to use triple exposure?

No, it definitely was not the first complex exposure - but Drew's adherence to such a high standard made the production much more costly in terms of shooting. Other works come to mind and now that I think about it, yes it was unusual, but the "record breaking" is sorta similar to today's "movie firsts" after the introduction of CGI. Unique and special, but probably more related for contemporary usage instead of having great historical value. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Release

• The goof by The Moving Picture World isn't earth shattering. I'm more concerned with seeing a reference for the seven reel claim.

Follows in reception. This is not really a controversial aspect, but it was because of the censorship board. I think the cuts to the film may have been able to take it down 1 reel, but it may have been an intermediary reporting and more cuts resulted in the final 5 reels. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Is it Kaer or Kear? Either way, people shouldn't need to look at the references to know who you're talking about.

Typo fixes, introduced Kear properly. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• "a depression in viewership": emotional or pocketbook? A less ambiguous word might be helpful.

Fixed. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Greater audiences than what? Other films? Live vaudeville acts?

Snipped the issue here, the drawing of crowds comes after the release - not prior. The showman's gusto got slipped in here accidentally. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• "boosted sales of the film" ticket sales, sales to theatres, or sales to a distributor?

It was not specific in the text. Though with the way the vaudeville productions work, it was likely sales of the film because most films ran for less than a week in venues - often single days. I just have not been able to piece together the exact meaning of those words from the source. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

"Reception" seems to pass.

Notes

• Perhaps this is the place to note the six reel claim?

Maybe. I tweaked it, think it is fine now? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• If there are other things that you can move down to notes, from the article proper, I'd suggest using <ref group=note> as is found in other articles, ex. Sesame Street#Notes.

Passing References, External links.

I'll review Plot and the lead later. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Passing "Plot", the lead. Placing the article on hold. -- Zanimum (talk) 17:56, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

It pains me to fail this article, as it's sooooo close, but it's passed the 7 day hold. @ChrisGualtieri:, please message me if you ever renominate the article. It's really, really close, I'd love to give it a GA. -- Zanimum (talk) 16:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I can work on this in a few hours! Ack. As mentioned I have been extremely busy and unable to spare more than a few minutes. I think I can work on most of these fixes in the next 30 mins. One second. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Fixes done. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

For simplicity (as opposed to creating a GA2), reopening and passing as GA. -- Zanimum (talk) 12:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)