Roar (film) 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. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The plot is incorrect and leads the reader to a totally wrong understanding of the movie subject and goals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.40.114.215 ( talk) 05:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: GamerPro64 ( talk · contribs) 04:23, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Going to make a claim to review this now and then start the review later.
GamerPro64 04:23, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Starting off the review, looking through the images used, File:Roar on set.jpg seems to have incomplete rationales. Needs to be filled in. GamerPro64 04:43, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
This took longer than expected. I am promoting this article to Good Article status. I think with a complete copyedit of the article it could stand a chance as a Featured Article. If anyone disagrees with this decision, they can take the article up for Good Article Reassessment. GamerPro64 02:22, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
NowIsntItTime,
At your request, I started a first parse of copy editing at 15:25 until now.
I am taking a break from it now, and have commented out the 'In use' & 'Under construction' templates until tomorrow morning, when I will have another long session on the article. I hope this helps.
With kind regards for now; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 18:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi,
NowIsntItTime,
Afternoon report:
Thank you for your kind words, above. Just a quick update to confirm I've completed
Development and
Pre-production this afternoon, and will do a little more tonight. I'll keep you posted as I go along. It's slow work, but we'll get there eventually...
With kind regards for now; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 17:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Evening report:
I've now completed the sections on
Filming and
Injuries and set damages. There are two items that require your attention:
Filming took five years to complete..." and provides an end date of "
October 16, 1979", whereas the first paragraph states that "
Principal photography began on October 1, 1976...". However, the time elapsed between these two dates is no more than three years, two weeks. You might consider reviewing the sources, to see if the "
five years" might have included other activities that are not mentioned in the current prose, which you might perhaps need to expand or rephrase? Thank you.
As a result of the flooding, the production and property took an entire year to recover. Filming was delayed for eight weeks. The set took eight months to be rebuilt ..." These three sentences don't seem to fit together: how was filming delayed by only eight weeks if the set took eight months to rebuild and the production and property took an entire year to recover? Please could you consult the sources again, and see if this part of the prose might need further clarification? Thank you.
The rest of the changes were essentially of rewording, or the application of MOS guidelines which I have documented in the edit summaries, as usual. I hope this is what you wanted; if you feel I need to do anything differently, then please let me know and I'll do my best. Thank you also for bearing with my slowness, but I think this work deserves to be done without rushing it. I'll do more tomorrow morning; this morning having been hijacked by activities in real life.
With kind regards,
NowIsntItTime; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 20:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Filming took five years to complete; though it ended on October 16, 1979, pick-up shots in Kenya were filmed during the editing stage."
The final stretch:
Hi,
NowIsntItTime,
I've now completed the remaining sections, from
Music to the end. The only sentence I'd ask you to consider rewriting is in
Legacy, near the end of the second paragraph:
She also said everyone involved had put their lives at risk to make the film as most of the damage was done as a result of "defying the odds" (though some of the people involved later went on to have successful careers in the film industry, including de Bont and Griffith).
Reason for asking: I am unclear about what is meant by: "as most of the damage was done ...". May I therefore suggest that you consider splitting the sentence into two and without parentheses? The object is to separate the two ideas: "lives put at risk for the film"260 and "some involved nonetheless enjoyed successful careers"285-286, after consulting the book again. Then, I can look at the result once more, if you deem it necessary.
Although I have been rigorous in reviewing every sentence, please note that I have not verified the prose for conformity to the sources, nor have I scrutinised the citation style you used, although it certainly looks very good at first glance. In case you wanted to see another example of citation style, please consider looking at the excellent
Australasian Antarctic Expedition, which is itself currently a
featured article candidate.
Anyway, while I was reviewing your article I could see that you put in a great deal of effort and, as a result, the article gives a very useful overview of this film. So, good luck; I wish you well with it.
As I've mentioned before, I thoroughly enjoyed working on your article and learnt a lot from reading it. Thanks once again for inviting me to participate, and please keep well.
With kind regards; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 16:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
She also said that the injuries inflicted on the crewmembers and cast were the result of putting their lives at risk to make the film. Hedren, however, noted a positive outcome for those who worked on Roar: many of the people involved went on to have successful careers and jobs in the film industry, such as de Bont and Griffith.Please tell me if this sounds much better, personally I think it's a big improvement than before.
Hi again,
NowIsntItTime,
I hope nobody will mind that I applied a few more changes this morning, after you nominated it at FAC yesterday. Having gone through it sentence by sentence during copy editing, I wanted to re-read it once more from beginning to end and check it for general flow. I found a few more things to improve, but I’ll stay away now; promise! Thanks again, and very best wishes.
With kind regards; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 11:42, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello,
So, a user has edited this page to remove content while claiming to be Tembo the elephant's trainer, instead of Pat Barbeau. So what needs to be done is to determine whether this is a random claim, or the real deal. I need some fellow contributors to chime into this discussion, because not only does this new story need verification on this IP address's part, but this may also determine whether the page needs a tag indicating that the contributor has a close connection with its subject. NowIsntItTime( chats)( doings) 02:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Roar (film) 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. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The plot is incorrect and leads the reader to a totally wrong understanding of the movie subject and goals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.40.114.215 ( talk) 05:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: GamerPro64 ( talk · contribs) 04:23, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Going to make a claim to review this now and then start the review later.
GamerPro64 04:23, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Starting off the review, looking through the images used, File:Roar on set.jpg seems to have incomplete rationales. Needs to be filled in. GamerPro64 04:43, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
This took longer than expected. I am promoting this article to Good Article status. I think with a complete copyedit of the article it could stand a chance as a Featured Article. If anyone disagrees with this decision, they can take the article up for Good Article Reassessment. GamerPro64 02:22, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
NowIsntItTime,
At your request, I started a first parse of copy editing at 15:25 until now.
I am taking a break from it now, and have commented out the 'In use' & 'Under construction' templates until tomorrow morning, when I will have another long session on the article. I hope this helps.
With kind regards for now; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 18:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi,
NowIsntItTime,
Afternoon report:
Thank you for your kind words, above. Just a quick update to confirm I've completed
Development and
Pre-production this afternoon, and will do a little more tonight. I'll keep you posted as I go along. It's slow work, but we'll get there eventually...
With kind regards for now; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 17:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Evening report:
I've now completed the sections on
Filming and
Injuries and set damages. There are two items that require your attention:
Filming took five years to complete..." and provides an end date of "
October 16, 1979", whereas the first paragraph states that "
Principal photography began on October 1, 1976...". However, the time elapsed between these two dates is no more than three years, two weeks. You might consider reviewing the sources, to see if the "
five years" might have included other activities that are not mentioned in the current prose, which you might perhaps need to expand or rephrase? Thank you.
As a result of the flooding, the production and property took an entire year to recover. Filming was delayed for eight weeks. The set took eight months to be rebuilt ..." These three sentences don't seem to fit together: how was filming delayed by only eight weeks if the set took eight months to rebuild and the production and property took an entire year to recover? Please could you consult the sources again, and see if this part of the prose might need further clarification? Thank you.
The rest of the changes were essentially of rewording, or the application of MOS guidelines which I have documented in the edit summaries, as usual. I hope this is what you wanted; if you feel I need to do anything differently, then please let me know and I'll do my best. Thank you also for bearing with my slowness, but I think this work deserves to be done without rushing it. I'll do more tomorrow morning; this morning having been hijacked by activities in real life.
With kind regards,
NowIsntItTime; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 20:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Filming took five years to complete; though it ended on October 16, 1979, pick-up shots in Kenya were filmed during the editing stage."
The final stretch:
Hi,
NowIsntItTime,
I've now completed the remaining sections, from
Music to the end. The only sentence I'd ask you to consider rewriting is in
Legacy, near the end of the second paragraph:
She also said everyone involved had put their lives at risk to make the film as most of the damage was done as a result of "defying the odds" (though some of the people involved later went on to have successful careers in the film industry, including de Bont and Griffith).
Reason for asking: I am unclear about what is meant by: "as most of the damage was done ...". May I therefore suggest that you consider splitting the sentence into two and without parentheses? The object is to separate the two ideas: "lives put at risk for the film"260 and "some involved nonetheless enjoyed successful careers"285-286, after consulting the book again. Then, I can look at the result once more, if you deem it necessary.
Although I have been rigorous in reviewing every sentence, please note that I have not verified the prose for conformity to the sources, nor have I scrutinised the citation style you used, although it certainly looks very good at first glance. In case you wanted to see another example of citation style, please consider looking at the excellent
Australasian Antarctic Expedition, which is itself currently a
featured article candidate.
Anyway, while I was reviewing your article I could see that you put in a great deal of effort and, as a result, the article gives a very useful overview of this film. So, good luck; I wish you well with it.
As I've mentioned before, I thoroughly enjoyed working on your article and learnt a lot from reading it. Thanks once again for inviting me to participate, and please keep well.
With kind regards; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 16:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
She also said that the injuries inflicted on the crewmembers and cast were the result of putting their lives at risk to make the film. Hedren, however, noted a positive outcome for those who worked on Roar: many of the people involved went on to have successful careers and jobs in the film industry, such as de Bont and Griffith.Please tell me if this sounds much better, personally I think it's a big improvement than before.
Hi again,
NowIsntItTime,
I hope nobody will mind that I applied a few more changes this morning, after you nominated it at FAC yesterday. Having gone through it sentence by sentence during copy editing, I wanted to re-read it once more from beginning to end and check it for general flow. I found a few more things to improve, but I’ll stay away now; promise! Thanks again, and very best wishes.
With kind regards; Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(become
old-fashioned!) 11:42, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello,
So, a user has edited this page to remove content while claiming to be Tembo the elephant's trainer, instead of Pat Barbeau. So what needs to be done is to determine whether this is a random claim, or the real deal. I need some fellow contributors to chime into this discussion, because not only does this new story need verification on this IP address's part, but this may also determine whether the page needs a tag indicating that the contributor has a close connection with its subject. NowIsntItTime( chats)( doings) 02:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)