Wikipedia:Peer review/Braveheart/archive1

Braveheart

Hello peers! Looking for some heads-up on how to improve the article and perhaps get it upgraded to 'A' Quality and perhaps (dare we dream) obtain a GA rating. Comments on what you think the article has too much of, or needs more of would be nifty. Arcayne 17:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Suggestions are below:

Rewrite Production into useful prose and support with citation. Origin of the project would be good as well, like why Gibson chose to pursue this particular time in history. Move Wikiquote template to External links section.
(Addressed) Purge Theme section unless you can find citation to back the claims made; the section also has weasel wording like "most notably" -- according to whom?
(Addressed) Re-format table in Cast section as a normal "Actor as Character" list. Brief descriptions of the characters and any encyclopedic information about the actors being cast would be nice.
Rewrite Response and awards section as prose. Also, are there any other notable awards that Braveheart won? Check out the Awards section on the film's IMDb page. Stuff like Golden Globes could be added; a possible rule of thumb is that if an award has its own Wikipedia article, it may be acceptable. Other criteria should apply, though. As for box office performance, more detail could be provided -- its premiere, anything unique about its opening, how it performed overseas, especially in the countries that are portrayed in the films.
Cultural effects section needs to be cited. There's an embedded link for what Lin Anderson said about the film shaping the political landscape; does the link have any information about how it was shaped?
Historical inaccuracy -- give it the 300 treatment and avoid synthesis. Find references of historians criticizing Braveheart directly.
(Addressed) Trivia -- purge it. It's trivial, after all.
Spoofs and references... equates Trivia, in my opinion. Might be better replaced by useful prose about the impact of Braveheart on certain aspects of popular culture.
Soundtrack and More Music from Braveheart -- I'd suggest a content fork, and if the music was a major part of the film, you could be redundant in having information about the music both at the film article and the newly-created soundtrack article, but only have the track listing at the latter.
(Addressed) External links -- there's two film reviews. I suggest making "Critical reaction" and "Historical inaccuracy" subsections under "Response and awards" (re-title the section as "Reaction" or "Reception"). Focus "Critical reaction" on the merits of directing, acting, editing, effects, violence, etc. Focus "Historical inaccuracy" on differences from the actual events, but keep it succinct. Not sure how far this film strays from the actual event compared to 300.
Expand lead paragraphs after all above points have been addressed.

Good luck! —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theme Section - removed unless someone finds a citation. Arcayne 16:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resorted sections so that under new Reception Section are the sections Box Office, Awards, Cultural Effects and Wallace Monument. Historical Accuracy is still its own section. Arcayne 16:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cast Section set to prose, removing table w/brief description of character and notable encyclopedic info about the cast where applicable. Using FA article as template. Arcayne 18:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Purged trivia section, incorporating info about dual period pieces by Cox in Cast section Arcayne 18:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded Spoofs and Cultural References by adding image of South Park's Chef in parody of Braveheart. I still have to address converting the bullet points into prose. Arcayne 19:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think the actual tracks are really necessary to list? I mean, a content fork will only list the tracks, leaving it pretty much an empty article. Making note of the greater amount of dialogue in the follow-up album seems to be enough to me. Thoughts? Arcayne 18:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]