Talk:Schindler's List/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Hello, I'll be conducting this article's GA review. From a quick glance, I already see that quite a bit of work is needed in order for it to properly cover all of the criteria. However, because the film (and therefore its article) is so very notable, I'm hoping that the main contributors here will work diligently to raise it to GA standards. All comments/suggestions will be listed in bullet format, so feel free to reply to each one as they are individually addressed. María (habla conmigo) 02:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments

• There are several clean-up tags listed in this article, which actually puts it in danger of being quickfailed. Again, I'm hoping that this can be taken care of during the review process. I moved the tags to the top of the page as per normal placement; "tags" is not a viable header.
• The lead section does not currently fulfill WP:LEAD in that it isn't a summary of the entire article. I would say that it could be expanded to three or four meaty paragraphs once all expansion/etc. is completed.
• The plot is too long. Per WP:FILMPLOT, "Plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words and should not exceed 900 words unless there is a specific reason, such as a very complicated plot." This film does not, in my opinion, have too complicated of a plot, so I would suggest aiming for between 400 and 700.
• Is the cast section necessary if a majority of the actors/characters are already listed in the plot summary? From what I gather, if there is one, there's no need for the other.
• Some of the quotes throughout "Production" do not have citations.
• Watch the overlinking; Schindlerjuden is linked at least three times, twice in one paragraph, for example.
• Although a great idea, the "Symbols" section is skimpy and seemingly random. It needs an introductory paragraph, something that introduces the importance of the various symbols in the film. Also, are there really only two worth mentioning? I'm honestly curious.
• No section on "Themes"?

• This is the most important issue: I'm a little concerned about the caliber of the references. With better refs comes better research. Since this is such an important film, there is actually a nice selection of academic sources available out there. I did a quick search at Worldcat, and I found some works that may be useful; incorporation of just two or three would instantly raise this article's status. Here is just a sampling that are available even at my dinky uni's library:

• Fensch, Thomas. Oskar Schindler and His List: the Man, the Book, the Film, the Holocaust and its Survivors. Forest Dale, Vt.: Paul S. Eriksson, 1995.
• Loshitzky, Yosefa. Spielberg's Holocaust: Critical Perspectives on Schindler's List. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997.
• Mintz, Alan L. Popular Culture and the Shaping of Holocaust Memory in America. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001.
• Palowski, Franciszek. The Making of Schindler's list: Behind the Scenes of an Epic Film. Secaucus, N.J.: Carol Pub. Group, 1998.

Okay, so those are the major things that stand out without prose nitpicking. Once the above issues have been addressed satisfactorily, I'll move into close-reading/copy-editing mode. For now I'm putting this article on hold. If there are any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me via my talk page. María (habla conmigo) 02:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm failing this article due to inactivity. I hope to see it improve and expand before its next nomination at GAC. María (habla conmigo) 13:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)