Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Assessment/RequestArchive1

Cast list added.-Hal Raglan 03:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cast list added.-Hal Raglan 03:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Upgraded to B-class.--Crzycheetah 23:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the missing Cast section (If you think some other actor should be there, add him/her). As you said, it really earned a "B" class. Good job! You can even nominate it for GA. --Crzycheetah 07:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've assessed it at B. Keep adding sources and look over the GA criteria and consider nominating it for GA once the article has met the criteria. --Nehrams2020 03:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I rated it as future class for now, until the film is released. --Nehrams2020 19:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should remain as a stub until a few more things are added. According to the template on the talk page, it just needs a few more categories and two more sections of information. The intro already talks about the sequel and awards, consider either moving that down into their own respective sections and expanding upon them. Once these are added, there shouldn't be a problem to rating it as a start. --Nehrams2020 19:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'll do it. Start class. Doctor Sunshine talk 02:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Upgraded to start class. --Nehrams2020 16:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As long as it meets the guidelines of the template on the talk page (when it's currently a stub), you can upgrade it to start. --Nehrams2020 20:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Add a cast list, categories for country and language, a source and fair use rationale for the movie poster, and for the award section, sound track is one word. Once these are fixed, you can reassess it to Start class. --Nehrams2020 22:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Importance is not that high of a priority for articles within our project, the main thing to focus on is its class (which is currently B, what I would have given it). I'd recommend continuing to add sources and updating the box office figures. Wait a few more weeks until the excitement dies down and then consider nominating it for GA. Make sure to look over the GA criteria first. --Nehrams2020 17:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is rated Start-class, but looks better than that. igordebraga ≠ 21:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Assessed to B, looks like it will soon become a GA at this point. --Nehrams2020 22:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rated stub-class; I've rewritten and expanded the article, would appreciate reassessment. Thanks! Flummery 20:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have assessed to start class, good work so far. Some things you can look to fix very easily is to add fair use rationales to the two images and add categories for the year the film was released, the country, and genres. If you want keep improving it to B or GA, consider getting a peer review to see what needs to be improved. --Nehrams2020 22:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Add a fair use rationale for the poster, categories for the genre(s), and add one other section of information (box office, reception, DVD release, etc.). Once these are added, it can be reassessed to Start. --Nehrams2020 21:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Plastictv 01:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good job, Start class. --Nehrams2020 17:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Assessed as Start class. --Nehrams2020 17:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Upgraded to Start class. --Nehrams2020 17:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Assessed as B class. Make sure to add some categories for the genre(s). Keep working on it and see if you can get it to GA. --Nehrams2020 17:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kung Fu Hustle
    • Expanded the plot and reorganized the pictures to follow the plot. Move the character list, that is over detailed into a new article, provided a link for to the new article. Please see if the quality is improved.--Kylohk 11:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For the article to reach B class, the cast section should be moved up after the plot, fair use rationales are needed for all of the images, the characters section should be expanded upon or combined with the cast section, perhaps mention the DVD release, add sources for the box office totals and rottentomatoes reviews, and I think you need a spoiler template before the parodies and references section. Once you address these, I will reassess it to B. If you want to go to GA, you should then work on adding more sources and looking to other GA films for examples on how to continue to improve it further. Let me know if you have any questions on my talk page. --Nehrams2020 18:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've upgraded it to start class. If you'd like to develop it further, I'd suggest a production section, also summary the reception in the lead. The interpretation section needs sources otherwise it'll qualify as original research and have to be deleted. The notes section can be renamed references, and the reference section deleted, as they are redundant. Some articles have both when there are a lot of books used, just to economize space, but that's not the case here. Small things, references shouldn't have spaces in between them. Sense of Cinema doesn't need to be italicized. The flags in the infobox for the countries qualifies as flagcruft but the release date one is fine. Anyway, good going. Doctor Sunshine talk 19:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The movie poster could also use a fair use rationale, look to Image:Norbit (2007 film) poster.jpg for an example. --Nehrams2020 19:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Upgraded to start, and we're not really worthy! --Nehrams2020 08:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Upgraded to start, keep up the good work. --Nehrams2020 19:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll reassess it to start if fair use rationales are added to all of the images, and one more section of information is needed. Perhaps box office, DVD release, critical release, etc. It should even have two of these since trivia isn't really that acceptable as a section. When you have addressed these issues leave a message here. --Nehrams2020 08:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OIC, can anyone recommend a section I could add? as it was a TV pilot and didn't have a DVD/box office release etc. Ryan4314 09:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It still should remain future class for WP:Films until its release date on May 17th. At that point , you can rate it to B class. --Nehrams2020 16:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Due to it's length it would normally remain a start class, but due to the many sources included in the article, I reassessed it as B. Keep up the good work, and keep improving it. I'd recommend expanding the fair use rationales a bit, look to some GA/FA film articles for examples. --Nehrams2020 17:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kung Fu Hustle
    • It is current a Start rating. I have integrated the Cast and characters section, and added the reception of RottenTomatoes and provided sources for the box office and Awards. Let's see if it's quality has been improved.--Kylohk 19:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll reassess it to B class, but it still needs a few things fixed of course. There may be too many screenshots to continue to qualify for fair use, so consider removing maybe two of them. The plot should also be shortened somewhat. The WP:Films guidelines recommends around 900 words, I think I counted over 1200-1300 words. Keep adding sources and consider getting a peer review to see if you want to keep working on this to bring it to GA. The more sources you add, the easier it's going to be to get more information and improve the chances of being raised to GA. --Nehrams2020 19:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm a Cheerleader

I assessed it as B, good work in expanding. It could use more expansion in the sections that are only a few sentences long, such as the box office and awards section. Maybe list how it did in it's first weekend compared to other films, or its ranking. Some of the smaller paragraphs could also be combined. I'd recommend taking it to WP:Films peer review department, and they'll help you to see what you still need for GA. --Nehrams2020 19:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aguirre, the Wrath of God
    • More work can and will be done to further improve the quality of this article, but recently I've greatly expanded it to the point where I believe it can now be reassessed as a "B" quality instead of the current "Start" class. Take a look and see if you agree.-Hal Raglan 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reassessed to B class. Good to see that each image has fair use rationale along with a lot of inline citations. Keep expanding of course, and consider a WP:Films Peer Review to see what further things need to be done to get it to GA. I think it's close with a little more expansion. --Nehrams2020 22:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article looks like it will be a B article once it is released, but for now it should stay at Future class until May 26. I'd consider waiting a few weeks before taking it to GA until all of the plot details slow down that are added by anons and the box office figures are up to date, and any other details are properly sourced. --Nehrams2020 22:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article is currently B class. I've trimmed the plot down to 677 words and added clear fair use images. I have also expanded the production section to cover chorerography, casting and music. The article is currently a Good Article Candidate. Let's see what you think of it.--Kylohk 13:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kung-Fu Hussle Poster.jpg needs a fair use rationale and the spacing for some of the inline citations need to be fixed (make sure they go directly after the punctuation). However, the article looks good to me, so at this time I don't see why it wouldn't pass unless there is something I'm missing besides the two things I listed. --Nehrams2020 20:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, this is my first stab at this and was hoping that someone could just have a look at what i have done. All there was for this film was a very short paragraph and nothing else. I added the infobox and a few sections, please let me know. Thanks. Murphy Inc 07:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I assessed this as a start class, good work on expanding it so far. The movie poster could use a fair use rationale and I think that the only license you need on it would just be the poster one, the copyrighted license isn't necessary. Leave a message on my talk page if you have any further questions. --Nehrams2020 20:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, i have taken your advice and have done much more work on the article adding screenshots and more general information, i think it is more or less finished now. Thanks for your help.
Perhaps you can wikify all the links, including the author and the retrieval date using the citation templates, also consider using a much more details fair use template for all images. I give it a B for the effort.--Kylohk 16:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was recently promoted to Good article status. The main editor, Kylohk, is aiming for FA, and I was wondering if it could be an A-class article in the interim? — WiseKwai 11:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like it qualifies, I'll change it now. --Nehrams2020 02:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article was recently promoted to B-Class status but since then i have made many changes including those that have been suggested by peers as above. I am wondering whether ot not be film article could be re-reviewed? Thanks Murphy Inc 10:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, B class is the highest it can get before nominating it at GAC for GA status. I would consider getting a peer review with the WP:Films which will provide a better review of the article to pinpoint anything else that needs to be fixed. Then, based on any comments you receive that are addressed, consider nominating at GAC once you have looked over the GA criteria. --Nehrams2020 02:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]