Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
There was some discussion about the length a couple of months ago and some information was trimmed. However it is still far too long. This falls foul of the focus criteria from the Good article criteria in a big way. A major problem is the excessive use of quotes throughout the article. I even think that the number of quotes used here leave it seriously open to copyright concerns. In part due to the quotes, the flow of the article is bad. Most paragraphs consist of just one critics view of the film and are then followed by a paragraph of another critics. At the very least this needs some serious paraphrasing or it will be delisted. AIRcorn (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Delisted Article fails to meet the focus requirements of a Good article. AIRcorn (talk) 04:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
There was some discussion about the length a couple of months ago and some information was trimmed. However it is still far too long. This falls foul of the focus criteria from the Good article criteria in a big way. A major problem is the excessive use of quotes throughout the article. I even think that the number of quotes used here leave it seriously open to copyright concerns. In part due to the quotes, the flow of the article is bad. Most paragraphs consist of just one critics view of the film and are then followed by a paragraph of another critics. At the very least this needs some serious paraphrasing or it will be delisted. AIRcorn (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Delisted Article fails to meet the focus requirements of a Good article. AIRcorn (talk) 04:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)