First, I am not going to do a full review, because I suck at anything but clear-cut reviews, and I don't want to start something again (see
Talk:Dol Guldur). But, a few comments for you:
per
WP:LEAD, the lead section should probably be a lot longer...4 paragraphs, probably.
Is it possible to get it longer? If not, I'll slash it.
per
WP:LEAD it is preferable to have no references in the lead.
All done. Leads for films are usually three paragraphs; the first paragraph is the plot, the second is development, the third is marketing, release, and reception. GaryKing (
talk)00:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have
fair use rationales:
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with
suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Excellent images!
Comments
Lead
These need to be sourced somewhere in the article!
The movie was scheduled for release on July 3, 1996, but due to the high level of anticipation for the film, many theaters began showing it on the evening of July 2, 1996, the same day the action in the film begins.
It currently holds the 19th highest worldwide gross for a movie all-time, and was at the forefront of the large-scale disaster film and science fiction resurgences of the mid-to-late-1990s.my bad. -talk-the_ed17-contribs-05:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Right you are ...my apologies. That fact is noted in the "distribution" section, and I added the one little detail to reflect what was said in the lead. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Should the summary be in past tense? (I really don't know, which is why the rest of these comments will still use present tense, but I think that it would sound a lot better with past tense...)
You say "several dozen saucer-shaped "destroyer" spacecraft"--why "destroyer"? The humans didn't know if they were "destroyer" craft.
When the David character is explaining his virus plan in the bunker, there is a drawing behind him, identifying them as such. I believe that's why "destroyer" is in quotation marks. (same with "attacker") -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I suppose. I don't know if re-wording to read ...saucer-shaped spacecraft (later referred to in the fim as "destroyers")... would be a good idea, but I'd suggest it anyway (using the word "destroyer" to describe that particular ship in all other mentions of it in the article would simplify things). The Defense Secretary does refer verbally to the smaller ships as "attackers" however. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
The Defense Secretary said that because he was trying to look better....just pick one and run with it, and then I'll slash it. -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
Argh! Glad to see this passed, but this is still bugging me. I guess I'm not being clear enough. The mother ship is the giant ship in orbit. The destroyers are the city-sized saucers that come down and blow up cities. The attackers are the smallest that engage the F-18s. What I meant was that the destroyers are never referred to as destroyers verbally in the film. BUT...in a drawn-up diagram of each ship, the city-sized ships are clearly labeled "destroyers". The movie is pretty straightforward about it....Jeff Goldblum points right at it for several seconds. They need to be described as "destroyers" in this article to distinguish them from "attackers", which are mentioned in the article as well but are completely different types of ships. I'll go ahead and change for now. If it's changed back, please discuss. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
00:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Earth's major cities should be de-linked, if one was to say that all of those 47 cities were destroyed, it would be OR.
"The President orders an evacuation of the targeted cities, but soon afterwards, the aliens, using advanced directed-energy weapons, destroy the cities."...sounds weird to me, maybe "The President orders large-scale evacuations of the targeted cities, but the aliens attacked with advanced directed energy weapons before these could occur."
I would suggest re-wording it without including the mention and wikilink of "directed-energy weapons." It links to a low quality article which includes a ton of OR in its sections regarding science fiction. What's difficult is describing the weapon without it being OR, since it's never really explained in the movie. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
The mention of "directed energy weapon". In the movie the middle of the underside of the ship opens up to reveal a big cone of sorts, which zaps down some kind of green/blue laser beam that blows up buildings and starts the chain reaction of destruction. This has to be described according to standard somehow. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Wellll I've seen articles with limited OR so that they could state something like that. Directed energy weapon is fine, because the weapon is obviously that, and anyone watching the movie can tell, so it not going to be mentioned in the movie as one, and its not going to be mentioned in reviews because everyone knows! -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
"The President, portions of his staff, and the Levinsons narrowly escape aboard Air Force One as a destroyer lays waste to Washington D.C." ....sounds weird also. Don't quite know how to re-word this one.
"The President narrowly escapes aboard Air Force One as a destroyer lays waste to Washington D.C.; only him, portions of his staff, and the Levinsons were able to get out aboard the plane." -talk-the_ed17-contribs-14:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"On July 3, the United States conducts a coordinated counterattack. A squadron of Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornets, the Black Knights stationed out of El Toro MCAS in Irvine, California..." ...On July 3, the United States conducts a coordinated counterattack; the movie follows one of these battles, showing a squadron of Marine Corps..." Does that sound better?
That does sound better. I would suggest leaving out the "stationed out of..." part. This info stretches the sentence too long, and can be found on the Black Knights article. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Add the italicized text: "Captain Steven Hiller (Will Smith) ends up as the sole survivor of all of the squadrons sent against the aliens"
Do we know for certain that the Hiller character was the only survivor of the attack? I would remove the part that states he's the "sole survivor" (I don't like the phrase "ends up" anyway). How about ..."releasing scores of 'attacker' ships, and a one-sided dogfight ensues. Captain Steven Hiller manages to survive the attack by luring a single attacker..."? -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Was it really the Grand Canyon...? I doubt it; the original attack was over Los Angeles!
It was, but eventually Hiller finds himself all the way out in the Grand Canyon while fleeing from an alien ship for so long. Remember him weaving about the canyon walls as the alien continued to give chase? -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Where did it say it was the Grand Canyon...? I know that it was a long time, but.... -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
But from what I can tell, it's intended to show possession. The braking parachute belongs to the jet. Or maybe it'll be best to remove the word altogether. We already know from earlier that he's in a jet. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"When lead scientist Dr. Brackish Okun (Brent Spiner) examines the new alien specimen, it attempts escape and takes control of his mind." Add something about how the all of the research team died...pretty big part there...
"...using B-2 Spirit bombers on an alien destroyer which is hovering over a deserted Houston..." how about "on one of the alien destroyer hovering over now-deserted Houston."
"On July 4, Levinson devises a plan to use the captured attacker to gain access to the interior..." What captured attacker? Was this mentioned earlier?
It was mentioned at the end of the second paragraph in the plot summary; "Area 51 conceals a top secret facility housing a repaired attacker and three alien bodies recovered from Roswell in 1947." -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Then the second part should use the words "repaired attacker" too, or the first one should be "captured attacker"... -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
Good point, since (according to the Roswell legend) it was recovered after a crash rather than "captured." Changed second mention to "repaired." -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"The underside of the alien craft opens up as its primary weapon" no one who has not seen the movie will know what the 'primary weapon is'.
This is another tricky one. If anyone can figure out a way to work around the similar problem that's stated above, this one should be easy to fix. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"Russell possesses the one remaining missile"....to "Russell possesses the last remaining missile"
Cast and characters
I like it.
Starring List
Bill Pullman and Jeff Goldblum should REALLY be before Will Smith in the cast list becuz #1 they appear before him and #2 they have much more roles in the movie then them. OK, I know that Pullman and Goldblum are behind Smith in the MOVIE, but changes can be made on here that is different i.e. Ralphie is below his parents on the starring list of A Christmas Story, but on the artical it's the other way around.
75.69.239.55 (
talk)
22:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)reply
Production
"hidden in some back field ...[o]r they arrive in little spores".... should [o]r be [or]?
I remember that Pullman ad-libbed his speech, from when I was watching DVDTV on AMC...add that in?
The source is apparently the "DVD commentary". I listened to the Blu-ray commentary...don't know itf it's the same, but, the producer pretty much told the story as exactly as it appears in the article. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I've seen discussions stating they can and they can't. I personally don't like them because a DVD commentary can't be accessed through a link at the end of an article. But, with all of that aside, in my last comment on this I was referring to simply the last line of the speech. Whether or not Pullman ad-libbed the whole speech is unknown by me. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I haven't seen that show personally so I don't think we should add it; if you've seen it and know that it supports that claim, then feel free to add it in for us. Thanks! GaryKing (
talk)15:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"A month after the film's release, jewelry designers and marketing consultants reported an increased interest in dolphin-themed jewelry, due to the fact that the character of Jasmine in the film wears dolphin earrings and is presented with a wedding ring that features a gold dolphin.[58]" Nice side note...very interesting!
Should the image of the TIME cover be removed? I seem to remember there being a fair use stipulation restricing the use of an image of a magazine cover unless it was in an article about the periodical itself. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
07:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Disregard...just read a discussion about the guidelines and it seems that magazine cover is allowed if it helps better illustrate a statement in the article about the significance of the film; it "was at the forefront of the large-scale disaster film and science fiction resurgences of the mid-to-late-1990s." -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
07:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Critical
It alternates...negative/positive/negative/positive etc. Maybe positive followed by negative? I dunno, this one isn't required...
Sequel
Rename the section to 'Possible sequel' or 'Discussed theme' or something of the like.
It looks like a lot was done while I was away. Thanks! It's hard to see what still needs to be done – by the looks of it, all of the issues raised have been addressed, though. I'd like to point out that plot sections in films, video games, and other similar articles are in present tense. GaryKing (
talk)14:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
First, I am not going to do a full review, because I suck at anything but clear-cut reviews, and I don't want to start something again (see
Talk:Dol Guldur). But, a few comments for you:
per
WP:LEAD, the lead section should probably be a lot longer...4 paragraphs, probably.
Is it possible to get it longer? If not, I'll slash it.
per
WP:LEAD it is preferable to have no references in the lead.
All done. Leads for films are usually three paragraphs; the first paragraph is the plot, the second is development, the third is marketing, release, and reception. GaryKing (
talk)00:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have
fair use rationales:
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with
suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Excellent images!
Comments
Lead
These need to be sourced somewhere in the article!
The movie was scheduled for release on July 3, 1996, but due to the high level of anticipation for the film, many theaters began showing it on the evening of July 2, 1996, the same day the action in the film begins.
It currently holds the 19th highest worldwide gross for a movie all-time, and was at the forefront of the large-scale disaster film and science fiction resurgences of the mid-to-late-1990s.my bad. -talk-the_ed17-contribs-05:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Right you are ...my apologies. That fact is noted in the "distribution" section, and I added the one little detail to reflect what was said in the lead. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Should the summary be in past tense? (I really don't know, which is why the rest of these comments will still use present tense, but I think that it would sound a lot better with past tense...)
You say "several dozen saucer-shaped "destroyer" spacecraft"--why "destroyer"? The humans didn't know if they were "destroyer" craft.
When the David character is explaining his virus plan in the bunker, there is a drawing behind him, identifying them as such. I believe that's why "destroyer" is in quotation marks. (same with "attacker") -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I suppose. I don't know if re-wording to read ...saucer-shaped spacecraft (later referred to in the fim as "destroyers")... would be a good idea, but I'd suggest it anyway (using the word "destroyer" to describe that particular ship in all other mentions of it in the article would simplify things). The Defense Secretary does refer verbally to the smaller ships as "attackers" however. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
The Defense Secretary said that because he was trying to look better....just pick one and run with it, and then I'll slash it. -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
Argh! Glad to see this passed, but this is still bugging me. I guess I'm not being clear enough. The mother ship is the giant ship in orbit. The destroyers are the city-sized saucers that come down and blow up cities. The attackers are the smallest that engage the F-18s. What I meant was that the destroyers are never referred to as destroyers verbally in the film. BUT...in a drawn-up diagram of each ship, the city-sized ships are clearly labeled "destroyers". The movie is pretty straightforward about it....Jeff Goldblum points right at it for several seconds. They need to be described as "destroyers" in this article to distinguish them from "attackers", which are mentioned in the article as well but are completely different types of ships. I'll go ahead and change for now. If it's changed back, please discuss. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
00:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Earth's major cities should be de-linked, if one was to say that all of those 47 cities were destroyed, it would be OR.
"The President orders an evacuation of the targeted cities, but soon afterwards, the aliens, using advanced directed-energy weapons, destroy the cities."...sounds weird to me, maybe "The President orders large-scale evacuations of the targeted cities, but the aliens attacked with advanced directed energy weapons before these could occur."
I would suggest re-wording it without including the mention and wikilink of "directed-energy weapons." It links to a low quality article which includes a ton of OR in its sections regarding science fiction. What's difficult is describing the weapon without it being OR, since it's never really explained in the movie. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
The mention of "directed energy weapon". In the movie the middle of the underside of the ship opens up to reveal a big cone of sorts, which zaps down some kind of green/blue laser beam that blows up buildings and starts the chain reaction of destruction. This has to be described according to standard somehow. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Wellll I've seen articles with limited OR so that they could state something like that. Directed energy weapon is fine, because the weapon is obviously that, and anyone watching the movie can tell, so it not going to be mentioned in the movie as one, and its not going to be mentioned in reviews because everyone knows! -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
"The President, portions of his staff, and the Levinsons narrowly escape aboard Air Force One as a destroyer lays waste to Washington D.C." ....sounds weird also. Don't quite know how to re-word this one.
"The President narrowly escapes aboard Air Force One as a destroyer lays waste to Washington D.C.; only him, portions of his staff, and the Levinsons were able to get out aboard the plane." -talk-the_ed17-contribs-14:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"On July 3, the United States conducts a coordinated counterattack. A squadron of Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornets, the Black Knights stationed out of El Toro MCAS in Irvine, California..." ...On July 3, the United States conducts a coordinated counterattack; the movie follows one of these battles, showing a squadron of Marine Corps..." Does that sound better?
That does sound better. I would suggest leaving out the "stationed out of..." part. This info stretches the sentence too long, and can be found on the Black Knights article. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Add the italicized text: "Captain Steven Hiller (Will Smith) ends up as the sole survivor of all of the squadrons sent against the aliens"
Do we know for certain that the Hiller character was the only survivor of the attack? I would remove the part that states he's the "sole survivor" (I don't like the phrase "ends up" anyway). How about ..."releasing scores of 'attacker' ships, and a one-sided dogfight ensues. Captain Steven Hiller manages to survive the attack by luring a single attacker..."? -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Was it really the Grand Canyon...? I doubt it; the original attack was over Los Angeles!
It was, but eventually Hiller finds himself all the way out in the Grand Canyon while fleeing from an alien ship for so long. Remember him weaving about the canyon walls as the alien continued to give chase? -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Where did it say it was the Grand Canyon...? I know that it was a long time, but.... -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
But from what I can tell, it's intended to show possession. The braking parachute belongs to the jet. Or maybe it'll be best to remove the word altogether. We already know from earlier that he's in a jet. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"When lead scientist Dr. Brackish Okun (Brent Spiner) examines the new alien specimen, it attempts escape and takes control of his mind." Add something about how the all of the research team died...pretty big part there...
"...using B-2 Spirit bombers on an alien destroyer which is hovering over a deserted Houston..." how about "on one of the alien destroyer hovering over now-deserted Houston."
"On July 4, Levinson devises a plan to use the captured attacker to gain access to the interior..." What captured attacker? Was this mentioned earlier?
It was mentioned at the end of the second paragraph in the plot summary; "Area 51 conceals a top secret facility housing a repaired attacker and three alien bodies recovered from Roswell in 1947." -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Then the second part should use the words "repaired attacker" too, or the first one should be "captured attacker"... -talk-the_ed17-contribs-
Good point, since (according to the Roswell legend) it was recovered after a crash rather than "captured." Changed second mention to "repaired." -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"The underside of the alien craft opens up as its primary weapon" no one who has not seen the movie will know what the 'primary weapon is'.
This is another tricky one. If anyone can figure out a way to work around the similar problem that's stated above, this one should be easy to fix. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"Russell possesses the one remaining missile"....to "Russell possesses the last remaining missile"
Cast and characters
I like it.
Starring List
Bill Pullman and Jeff Goldblum should REALLY be before Will Smith in the cast list becuz #1 they appear before him and #2 they have much more roles in the movie then them. OK, I know that Pullman and Goldblum are behind Smith in the MOVIE, but changes can be made on here that is different i.e. Ralphie is below his parents on the starring list of A Christmas Story, but on the artical it's the other way around.
75.69.239.55 (
talk)
22:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)reply
Production
"hidden in some back field ...[o]r they arrive in little spores".... should [o]r be [or]?
I remember that Pullman ad-libbed his speech, from when I was watching DVDTV on AMC...add that in?
The source is apparently the "DVD commentary". I listened to the Blu-ray commentary...don't know itf it's the same, but, the producer pretty much told the story as exactly as it appears in the article. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
05:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I've seen discussions stating they can and they can't. I personally don't like them because a DVD commentary can't be accessed through a link at the end of an article. But, with all of that aside, in my last comment on this I was referring to simply the last line of the speech. Whether or not Pullman ad-libbed the whole speech is unknown by me. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
06:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I haven't seen that show personally so I don't think we should add it; if you've seen it and know that it supports that claim, then feel free to add it in for us. Thanks! GaryKing (
talk)15:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"A month after the film's release, jewelry designers and marketing consultants reported an increased interest in dolphin-themed jewelry, due to the fact that the character of Jasmine in the film wears dolphin earrings and is presented with a wedding ring that features a gold dolphin.[58]" Nice side note...very interesting!
Should the image of the TIME cover be removed? I seem to remember there being a fair use stipulation restricing the use of an image of a magazine cover unless it was in an article about the periodical itself. -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
07:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Disregard...just read a discussion about the guidelines and it seems that magazine cover is allowed if it helps better illustrate a statement in the article about the significance of the film; it "was at the forefront of the large-scale disaster film and science fiction resurgences of the mid-to-late-1990s." -
SoSaysChappy (
talk)
07:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Critical
It alternates...negative/positive/negative/positive etc. Maybe positive followed by negative? I dunno, this one isn't required...
Sequel
Rename the section to 'Possible sequel' or 'Discussed theme' or something of the like.
It looks like a lot was done while I was away. Thanks! It's hard to see what still needs to be done – by the looks of it, all of the issues raised have been addressed, though. I'd like to point out that plot sections in films, video games, and other similar articles are in present tense. GaryKing (
talk)14:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply