The article was not promoted by GrahamColm 10:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC) [1]. reply
The Whistleblower ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
This article is about a 2010 thriller film inspired by Nebraska police officer Kathryn Bolkovac's account of human trafficking in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina. It passed as a GA in October 2013 and underwent a copyedit by the Guild of Copy Editors in December 2013, and I believe it now meets the FA criteria. 1ST7 ( talk) 21:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC) reply
Source review - spotchecks not done
The first sentence of the "Reviews" section could be worded better. The sentence currently reads ...Rottentomatoes.com graded the film 74 percent, with a rating of 6.5/10. Out of 109 reviews, 81 were positive." A look at Rotten Tomatoes indicates that 115 critics have reviewed the film. I suggest you change the sentence to: "The review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a 74% approval rating based on reviews from 115 critics, with an average score of 6.5/10. The website reported the critical consensus as "Rachel Weisz puts on a compelling smoldering act though the film suffers from a literal-minded approach to the material"."
Other than that, the article looks great. I'm happy to support this for FA. 23 editor ( talk) 22:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC) reply
Closing comment - Sadly this nomination has stalled and I will archive it shortly. The nom has been running since Christmas but there have been no new reviews for some weeks. Graham Colm ( talk) 20:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC) reply
The article was not promoted by GrahamColm 10:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC) [1]. reply
The Whistleblower ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
This article is about a 2010 thriller film inspired by Nebraska police officer Kathryn Bolkovac's account of human trafficking in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina. It passed as a GA in October 2013 and underwent a copyedit by the Guild of Copy Editors in December 2013, and I believe it now meets the FA criteria. 1ST7 ( talk) 21:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC) reply
Source review - spotchecks not done
The first sentence of the "Reviews" section could be worded better. The sentence currently reads ...Rottentomatoes.com graded the film 74 percent, with a rating of 6.5/10. Out of 109 reviews, 81 were positive." A look at Rotten Tomatoes indicates that 115 critics have reviewed the film. I suggest you change the sentence to: "The review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a 74% approval rating based on reviews from 115 critics, with an average score of 6.5/10. The website reported the critical consensus as "Rachel Weisz puts on a compelling smoldering act though the film suffers from a literal-minded approach to the material"."
Other than that, the article looks great. I'm happy to support this for FA. 23 editor ( talk) 22:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC) reply
Closing comment - Sadly this nomination has stalled and I will archive it shortly. The nom has been running since Christmas but there have been no new reviews for some weeks. Graham Colm ( talk) 20:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC) reply