Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Peer review/Kung Fu Hustle

Kung Fu Hustle

Kung Fu Hustle is currently a B class article. I've made substantial improvements to it, including:

A new Production section.
Multiple references for the lead, release information, soundtrack and reception sections.
Trimmed the plot down to less than 900 words, improving the prose.
Removed the trivia section, and rewriting the Parodies and References section in paragraph form.

My goal is to improve the quality of the article to FA quality. Any feedback is appreciated. Cheers.--Kylohk 13:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The film has a simple plot, so I suggest cutting down to 700 words and losing the middle image. Alientraveller 16:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the MOS for films and have to agree with you. Therefore, I've deleted content related to two non-essential scenes, and that lowered the word count down to 677. Any other comments?--Kylohk 18:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions by Wisekwai

A lot of work has gone into this article and it has definitely improved. Great work on a great film! Here are some suggestions that I think will improve it further:

In general, I think more wikilinks are needed, especially on titles of other films, people (like Yuen Woo-ping, Jackie Chan, Buster Keaton, etc.) and influential characters such as Bugs Bunny, Road Runner (note, two words, correct link), as well as technical terms (like CGI, and perhaps even ordinary objects that are significant in the film, such as axe and ice cream.
All film titles should be italicized.
I feel very strongly that better quality images are needed. Perhaps some unwatermarked publicity stills could replace the screenshots? The screenshots are generally too murky and blurry to be useful.
In my experience, this should easily become a Good article. It will need more work and references to make it to FA status. — WiseKwai 15:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I've taken your points into account and added the Wikilinks to areas I deem to be worthy of attention. I have also italicized all film titles. Also, I admit that I never noticed those watermarks. I guess I will go and borrow the DVD from a relative and take several screenshots with the PrintScreen. Thanks for the quick response.--Kylohk 19:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More suggestions

I've been back through the article and have done the following:

Some light copy editing and condensing.
I introduced some more wikilinks and corrected some others.
I expanded the infobox to include fields that were missing, such as cinematographer, music, etc. The release dates were expanded to include the premiere and two other major English-language markets.

On reaching FA status, I would suggest the following:

Try for Good article status first. That review will mean more critical eyes will see this article and be able to help improve it.
Consider running the article through the Automated Peer Reviewer.
Consider submitting the article to WP:LoCE, the League of Copy Editors.
Perhaps the production section could be expanded a bit? Perhaps the casting notes section could be moved into the production section, which could cover the film's origins, its influences, the actual production and techniques and the marketing.
Are there any books written about the film or Stephen Chow? Such "hard" citations will go a long way towards ensuring it reaches FA status.

And some nitpicky stuff:

Should the article be written in British English or American English? It being a Hong Kong film, British English would make sense, although there is nothing wrong with American English. Currently, both usages are present, with words like "programme" and "realizes".
The way the dates are stated strike me as clumsy. It would read much cleaner without the superscript "nd", "th", etc. Also, if a full date is stated, it should be wikified, but partial dates are not wikilinked. — WiseKwai 05:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Books on Kung Fu Hustle? There will be a big challange, but I will try and find them. As for the British spelling, I've fixed it once more, and narrowed one of the screenshots. Cheers.--Kylohk 10:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is looking good. Sorry that I wasn't clear on the dates. I think the "nd", "th", "st" on the numbers in the dates, superscript or not, are unnecessary and add clutter. It will look cleaner, but will still read the same, and will be easy to wikilink. — WiseKwai 10:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New update

I have made more changes to the article as follows:

Casting notes has been moved up as a casting section on Production. Detail about 4 of the actors is written out with sources.
Filming received its own subsection in Production, and an interview which I found with the CGI company is used as a reference for CGI production.
A fair use image about the CGI construction of the Buddhist Palm has been added to the production section.

I believe that the article should more or less be ready for a GA nomination. Cheers.--Kylohk 16:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Candidate

The article is now a Good Article Candidate. Please go and have a close look at the article. If there are no problems, feel free to promote it.--Kylohk 16:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The next step: Featured status

I'm pleased that the article has passed the GA. Now, it's time to aim higher, to featured status. Of course, any feedback is appreciated.--Kylohk 19:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]