![]() | Midsommar has been listed as one of the
Media and drama good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 20, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | A fact from Midsommar appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 7 February 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
There are conflicting reports on if it's Midsommar or Sommar. Either way, it should be consistent and should be added to the appropriate disambiguation page. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 00:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The premise is that white Swedish are bad, their traditions are bad, and that the nation should become a giant version of Rinkeby (which is a failed and crime-ridden social experiment on the outskirts of Stockholm). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:140C:9B12:1:2:978B:AC0F ( talk) 00:02, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
What's the basis for putting "comedy" in the genre description? It strikes me as a film that takes itself extremely seriously. Barnabypage ( talk) 13:55, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
During the final fire scene, the plot summary says the two dead cultists are the senicide elders who threw themselves off the cliff earlier in the film. This cannot be the case as their bodies were burned over a pyre well before the final scene. This should be corrected in the plot summary. PokeHomsar ( talk) 01:41, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
AFI Allmovie.com specifically classifies this film as mystery/horror
[1]. I see no mention of folk. If you want to retain the folk classification, please indicate what source you're using for it.
DonIago (
talk)
14:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
I think the movie would honestly fit nicely as being listed a “psychological folk horror” due to the fact many of the scenes are meant to unease and disturb the viewer. ChrisBungle ( talk) 02:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Midsommer (upcoming film). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:48, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Tried to add a See Also link to the Wicker Man movie and my edits keep being reverted. IMDB has the Wicker Man as a movie connection to Midsommer due to plot similarities. Not wanting to get into an endless edit loop could some people who have seen both films comment if there should be a link between these movies and do the proper link for me because it seems the way I am doing it does not satisfy some editors. Septagram ( talk) 07:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Did anyone recognize the US city the film plays in? Not important for the plot, I am just interested. Thanks in advance! - Abzo ( talk) 13:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
In my revision 984964912, I tried to restore the article's veracity regarding the spelling of the character name 'Maja' by reverting changes to 'Maya.'
I included a still photograph from the credits, backing up my decision. I can appreciate if my image does not meet the standards for a credible citation, but because my revert was reverted without explanation, I have no such gesture of good faith.
After my revert was reverted, a third user seems to have come in to manually reproduce (over the course of three separate edits) the correct spelling. I am concerned that this is turning into an edit war, because this article has been revised on three separate occasions by the same user for the same reason (trying to keep the spelling as 'Maya'). I would appreciate any comments and suggestions.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.15.116.160 ( talk) 04:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved ( non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 04:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Midsommar (film) →
Midsommar – When comparing
pageviews between this article and the article for the celebration
Midsummer, it seems clear that significantly more people are looking for this article. Within the Midsummer article, the spelling "Midsommar" only appears as an alternate name in its infobox, while the spelling is predominantly associated with this film, which is also reflected in the
Google search results for "Midsommar". Amending this page's hatnote to an "other uses" template pointing to
Midsummer (disambiguation) would seem like an easy solution.
Sock
(tock talk)
23:21, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
A separate article currently exists for Dani Ardor, the main protagonist of Midsommar. This character does not seem to be of any note outside of the context of the film, and the article's content contains nothing that couldn't/shouldn't be included in the main Midsommar article. Hence, I propose merging that article into this one.. Cripesohblimey ( talk) 08:57, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
The section on critical response seems somewhat biased towards a negative or muddled view of the film. This only struck because it got generally favorable reviews from Critics according to aggregate scores, but negative views seem to out weight the positive when it comes to individually listed reviews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.27.204.252 ( talk) 01:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk ( talk · contribs) 21:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm starting my review now, hope to have it done today or tomorrow. -
MyCatIsAChonk (
talk)
21:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Spelling/grammar are correct, prose is concise and makes sense. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The cast list is correctly formatted and the synopsis is 699 words, one under the 700 word limit; nice. Everything else is good. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Proper list of references at the bottom, and all claims are cited. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All quotes and claims are cited; the "themes and analysis" and "reception" sections are quite heavy with these, and they're all cited correctly. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | No original research that I can see. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig shows no violations, and quotes are properly cited. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Addresses all the topics you'd usually see on an article about a film. The addition of the "themes and analysis" section was helpful and interesting too. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Readable prose size and stays focused. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Sections that could be biased (especially reviews/reception) are all quoted and properly cited. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No edit wars. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All media is correctly tagged; theatrical release poster has non-free use rationale. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are relevant and have suitable captions. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Very nice article, and seems like an interesting movie. Nicely done, and thanks to @ Cinemacriterion: for creating this article and contributing a good bit and to @ Arcahaeoindris: for contributing a lot and nominating. - MyCatIsAChonk ( talk) 00:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
The result was: promoted by
Bruxton (
talk)
00:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Arcahaeoindris ( talk). Self-nominated at 16:26, 21 January 2023 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
In the plot summary, Simon is subjected to a blood eagle (the person's back is split open and their lungs are taken out of the body, but are still connected and still work), and the subtitles reveal the lungs are still working and he is breathing, indicating he is alive--but the plot summary states "Simon's 'corpse'."
Klee Bakudan ( talk) 19:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Why are only American reviews quoted? It's had an international release. 217.42.0.94 ( talk) 19:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, as someone who has never edited a wikipedia article, I wanted to add a piece of media that was inspired by this movie but havent found any categories to do so. Is it possible/allowed? Ioonaespa ( talk) 14:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Midsommar has been listed as one of the
Media and drama good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 20, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | A fact from Midsommar appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 7 February 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
There are conflicting reports on if it's Midsommar or Sommar. Either way, it should be consistent and should be added to the appropriate disambiguation page. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 00:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The premise is that white Swedish are bad, their traditions are bad, and that the nation should become a giant version of Rinkeby (which is a failed and crime-ridden social experiment on the outskirts of Stockholm). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:140C:9B12:1:2:978B:AC0F ( talk) 00:02, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
What's the basis for putting "comedy" in the genre description? It strikes me as a film that takes itself extremely seriously. Barnabypage ( talk) 13:55, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
During the final fire scene, the plot summary says the two dead cultists are the senicide elders who threw themselves off the cliff earlier in the film. This cannot be the case as their bodies were burned over a pyre well before the final scene. This should be corrected in the plot summary. PokeHomsar ( talk) 01:41, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
AFI Allmovie.com specifically classifies this film as mystery/horror
[1]. I see no mention of folk. If you want to retain the folk classification, please indicate what source you're using for it.
DonIago (
talk)
14:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
I think the movie would honestly fit nicely as being listed a “psychological folk horror” due to the fact many of the scenes are meant to unease and disturb the viewer. ChrisBungle ( talk) 02:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Midsommer (upcoming film). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:48, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Tried to add a See Also link to the Wicker Man movie and my edits keep being reverted. IMDB has the Wicker Man as a movie connection to Midsommer due to plot similarities. Not wanting to get into an endless edit loop could some people who have seen both films comment if there should be a link between these movies and do the proper link for me because it seems the way I am doing it does not satisfy some editors. Septagram ( talk) 07:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Did anyone recognize the US city the film plays in? Not important for the plot, I am just interested. Thanks in advance! - Abzo ( talk) 13:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
In my revision 984964912, I tried to restore the article's veracity regarding the spelling of the character name 'Maja' by reverting changes to 'Maya.'
I included a still photograph from the credits, backing up my decision. I can appreciate if my image does not meet the standards for a credible citation, but because my revert was reverted without explanation, I have no such gesture of good faith.
After my revert was reverted, a third user seems to have come in to manually reproduce (over the course of three separate edits) the correct spelling. I am concerned that this is turning into an edit war, because this article has been revised on three separate occasions by the same user for the same reason (trying to keep the spelling as 'Maya'). I would appreciate any comments and suggestions.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.15.116.160 ( talk) 04:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved ( non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 04:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Midsommar (film) →
Midsommar – When comparing
pageviews between this article and the article for the celebration
Midsummer, it seems clear that significantly more people are looking for this article. Within the Midsummer article, the spelling "Midsommar" only appears as an alternate name in its infobox, while the spelling is predominantly associated with this film, which is also reflected in the
Google search results for "Midsommar". Amending this page's hatnote to an "other uses" template pointing to
Midsummer (disambiguation) would seem like an easy solution.
Sock
(tock talk)
23:21, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
A separate article currently exists for Dani Ardor, the main protagonist of Midsommar. This character does not seem to be of any note outside of the context of the film, and the article's content contains nothing that couldn't/shouldn't be included in the main Midsommar article. Hence, I propose merging that article into this one.. Cripesohblimey ( talk) 08:57, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
The section on critical response seems somewhat biased towards a negative or muddled view of the film. This only struck because it got generally favorable reviews from Critics according to aggregate scores, but negative views seem to out weight the positive when it comes to individually listed reviews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.27.204.252 ( talk) 01:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk ( talk · contribs) 21:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm starting my review now, hope to have it done today or tomorrow. -
MyCatIsAChonk (
talk)
21:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Spelling/grammar are correct, prose is concise and makes sense. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The cast list is correctly formatted and the synopsis is 699 words, one under the 700 word limit; nice. Everything else is good. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Proper list of references at the bottom, and all claims are cited. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All quotes and claims are cited; the "themes and analysis" and "reception" sections are quite heavy with these, and they're all cited correctly. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | No original research that I can see. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig shows no violations, and quotes are properly cited. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Addresses all the topics you'd usually see on an article about a film. The addition of the "themes and analysis" section was helpful and interesting too. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Readable prose size and stays focused. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Sections that could be biased (especially reviews/reception) are all quoted and properly cited. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No edit wars. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All media is correctly tagged; theatrical release poster has non-free use rationale. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are relevant and have suitable captions. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Very nice article, and seems like an interesting movie. Nicely done, and thanks to @ Cinemacriterion: for creating this article and contributing a good bit and to @ Arcahaeoindris: for contributing a lot and nominating. - MyCatIsAChonk ( talk) 00:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
The result was: promoted by
Bruxton (
talk)
00:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Arcahaeoindris ( talk). Self-nominated at 16:26, 21 January 2023 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
In the plot summary, Simon is subjected to a blood eagle (the person's back is split open and their lungs are taken out of the body, but are still connected and still work), and the subtitles reveal the lungs are still working and he is breathing, indicating he is alive--but the plot summary states "Simon's 'corpse'."
Klee Bakudan ( talk) 19:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Why are only American reviews quoted? It's had an international release. 217.42.0.94 ( talk) 19:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, as someone who has never edited a wikipedia article, I wanted to add a piece of media that was inspired by this movie but havent found any categories to do so. Is it possible/allowed? Ioonaespa ( talk) 14:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)