Wikipedia:Peer review/Scream (film)/archive1

Scream (film)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I've overhauled it from this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scream_(film)&diff=423380818&oldid=423378618

I've rewritten the plot, got rid of the trivia section, styled everything, done some aesthetic stuff, added the entire development section plus some really illustrative images, added citations and mulitiple sources, corrected incorrect information and generally I believe this has gone from an overall bad article to a very good one. I'd like to think that with some small input this can be ready for a GAN soon so I appreciate any input.

Thanks for reading, Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Quick comment - this currently has 7 fair use images - how does that comply with WP:NFCC? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I get what you are saying but I believe that the images used are important to illustrate the areas they exist in. As with previous peer review suggestiosn from you, in this case I used Alien (film) as an example, which contains 11 images and is a GA. In this article I firmly believe that the images I have included are important to the completeness of the article, the visual effect ones in particular which explain far better what is going on than prose is capable of and are not simply for decorative purposes. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I looked at it, and Aliens (film) has only 7 fair use images, the same as this. In each case there, the image is near the text discussing it and is discussued in some detail in the article. In four of seven cases (all but the poster, cast photo, and model) the fair use images in Alien are from the film itself - here none of the fair use images seem to be from the film itself. Here is a review of each image in this article. One of the things to think about is this "Does the image increase the reader's understanding in a way that just the text alone does not?". You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-08-11/Dispatches on image licenses.

1. File:Scream (1996 film) poster.jpg - an image of the theatrical poster for the film is pretty standard in articles on films, so this is OK.
2. File:Scream-cast-at-fountain.jpg - I will note that there are free images of each actor or actress listed as starring in the infobox (and in this image) except for Skeet Ullrich. This does not appear to be a scene from the movie (it is labeled a promotional photo) and the individual images of the actors are almost all replacable with free images. In Aliens the cast photo shows them in more readily identifiable costumes with weapons, so it seems more justifiable as fair use to me.
3. File:Ghostfacemaskdiscovery.jpg - how does seeing this image help the reader understand the article any better than the text (which is in the next section and is just one sentence)? While location scouting, Maddalena discovered the Ghostface mask hanging from a post inside the house previously used for the film Shadow of a Doubt (1943).[5] Please note that since the Ghostface mask is iconic and not easily described in words (and is discussed in some detail in the article) I think a fair use image of the mask is justified, but am not sure this is the best one that could be chosen.
4. File:Maskmouldmsall.jpg - it is not clear to me what this is a mould for - is it for the mask used in the movie or is it for an earlier version trying to look like the one ultimatley used, but not exactly like it for copyright reasons? The caption needs to be clearer if the image is used. If it is for the mask used in the movie, wouldn't a fair use image of the mask itself be better (and if there is one image of the mask itself, two are almost certainly not justified). If it is for the mask design used before the final mask chosen, I am not sure. Does a mould for a mask not used in the film really help the reader's understanding?

   By the way, the images above and below this comment sandwich the text, which is something you are not supposed to do under WP:MOSIMAGE.

5. File:Visualeffectsscream1.jpg - please note that this counts as two images (even though it is one file). I think these both have a pretty good case for fair use. The chair is probably the stronger of the two (it really increased my understanding of how the effect was done), but the Barrymore mask is also helpful (and creepy).
6. File:Screamsoundtrack.jpg - while images of album cover art are standard in articles on albums, I note that this is basically just a crop of the movie poster image (so does the article need a second fair use image that is essentially a duplicate of the first?). I also note that Template:Infobox_album#Cover says in part The width of the image should ideally be no less than 220px (the default value of the "Thumbnail size" parameter), and it should be no more than 300px on at least one side (the maximum value of the "Thumbnail size" parameter) to satisfy fair use criteria. but this image is 350 px wide.

Finally, please note that the image review at GAN is generally less stringent than at FAC, so even though this may pass with 7 fair use images at GAN, I doubt it would at FAC. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Is the difference with Alien (film) that some of the images have creative commons license?

Yes, creative commons or any free licenses are not a problem, only the fair use images are of concern (so the image of Neve Campbell in this article is fine, as it has a free license). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

1. File:Scream-cast-at-fountain.jpg - Well it's taken at a scene from the film (I don't know if you have seen it), but it is them out of character but in costume and position during that particular scene so I don't know if that would make a difference. Would it better if I screencap'd them IN character from that scene?
2. File:Ghostfacemaskdiscovery.jpg - You make a fair point, I felt it was important because as you mention, the mask is iconic and I thought seeing the exact mask that was found (its a photo of it as it was found) that basically was the origin for the iconic image we have today would be notable. I guess that is debatable.
3. File:Maskmouldmsall.jpg - Fair point, its a mold for a mask they used to copy the original design but avoid copyright, I will clarify it.
4. File:Screamsoundtrack.jpg - Just to be clear I didn't crop it, that's the actual album art. I have considered breaking this section off into its own article so maybe that would deal with that particular image. I will also resize it, I was told 350 was fine for fair use purposes.

Thanks for the feedback

EDIT: I read the image tutorial but without more text I can't see a reasonable solution to the "sandwich" effect in the Visual Effects section that wouldn't lead to the images bleeding heavily into lower sections. Do you have any suggestions for that?Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Just to be clear, while this may be OK at GAN with the current images (depends on who the reviewer is there), it would not be OK at FAC. I have not seen the film. To me the two weakest fair use images are File:Ghostfacemaskdiscovery.jpg and File:Maskmouldmsall.jpg. Neither is taken from the film itself, neither really helped me understand the topic better than the descriptions already in the article, and the mould is for a mask that does not appear in the film. I would suggest replacing both of these with one fair use image of the Ghostface character from the film, where the discovery image now is (which would reduce the number of fair use images to 6, and solve the sandwich problem). I know you did not crop the album cover, my point is the album cover and movie poster are basically two versions of the same fair use image. This is just my suggestion, feel free to see what the GAN reviewer says. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this, here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to GAN.

• First sentence of the lead is pretty long and comples and may be better split into two. I would also take out "created and" as a) this is not repeated in the article and b) the creator of a film is not usually a single person (the actors and writer and director and technical people all create it together). Scream is a 1996 American slasher film created and written by Kevin Williamson and directed by Wes Craven, starring Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, Drew Barrymore and David Arquette, released on December 20, 1996 as the first installment in the Scream film series.
• Direct quotes in the lead are usually cited per WP:MOSQUOTE
• MOS says to spell out 1970s and 1980s in numerous sequels to established horror franchises of the 70s and 80s which were drawing both decreasing financial and critical success
• Watch WP:OVERLINKing - usually links are only provided for things directly related to the article or for unfamiliar terms to most readers. This also makes the links provided more noticable and thus useful. So, for example, in plot does the average reader really need a link to Journalism to explain "news reporter"?
• Prose is decent but could use a copyedit in places to polish things. I think "producers" is often meant where "production" is used. One example (can also be tightened) is However, young actress Drew Barrymore read the script for the film and became interested in being involved, approaching the production herself to request a role.
• Watch language too - dynasty? acclaimed? famous? Barrymore, a member of the Barrymore family dynasty and granddaughter of acclaimed American actor John Barrymore, had become a famous star in her own right starring in E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial and the production were quick to take advantage of her unexpected interest, signing her to play the lead role of Sidney Prescott.[2][3] Are there non-famous stars?
• A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. Halloween (1978 film) is a FA and may be a good model.
• I question the current organization. Parts of the cast section are out of chronological order (we are told Craven reconsidered directing there before knowing he rejected the film). Again following Halloween (1978 film), I think I would put the Plot first, then the creative process in order (Writing, Development, Casting (current Cast section), Filming and then the same order.
• Cinematography is only one paragraph - could it be combined with Filming?
• More Overlinking - why is Marco Beltrami linked 15 times in the Score table (and once more in the section)
• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

• First sentence of the lead is pretty long and comples and may be better split into two. I would also take out "created and" as a) this is not repeated in the article and b) the creator of a film is not usually a single person (the actors and writer and director and technical people all create it together). Scream is a 1996 American slasher film created and written by Kevin Williamson and directed by Wes Craven, starring Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, Drew Barrymore and David Arquette, released on December 20, 1996 as the first installment in the Scream film series.
• Direct quotes in the lead are usually cited per WP:MOSQUOTE
• MOS says to spell out 1970s and 1980s in numerous sequels to established horror franchises of the 70s and 80s which were drawing both decreasing financial and critical success

*Watch WP:OVERLINKing - usually links are only provided for things directly related to the article or for unfamiliar terms to most readers. This also makes the links provided more noticable and thus useful. So, for example, in plot does the average reader really need a link to Journalism to explain "news reporter"?

• Prose is decent but could use a copyedit in places to polish things. I think "producers" is often meant where "production" is used. One example (can also be tightened) is However, young actress Drew Barrymore read the script for the film and became interested in being involved, approaching the production herself to request a role.
• Watch language too - dynasty? acclaimed? famous? Barrymore, a member of the Barrymore family dynasty and granddaughter of acclaimed American actor John Barrymore, had become a famous star in her own right starring in E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial and the production were quick to take advantage of her unexpected interest, signing her to play the lead role of Sidney Prescott.[2][3] Are there non-famous stars?
• A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. Halloween (1978 film) is a FA and may be a good model.
• *I question the current organization. Parts of the cast section are out of chronological order (we are told Craven reconsidered directing there before knowing he rejected the film). Again following Halloween (1978 film), I think I would put the Plot first, then the creative process in order (Writing, Development, Casting (current Cast section), Filming and then the same order.
• Cinematography is only one paragraph - could it be combined with Filming?
• More Overlinking - why is Marco Beltrami linked 15 times in the Score table (and once more in the section)
• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please seeWikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.) Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch, Halloween doesn't appear to be a FAC, just so you're aware for the future.