This user subpage is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you might try contacting the user in question or seeking broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
Several editors have expressed an interest in making alterations to the guideline to reflect what seems to be common practise when it comes to shaping the "Reception" and "Release" sections of film articles. The proposed revision below adds more detailed rationales for the recommendations many of us make on a day-to-day basis. This expansion would replace the existing "Distribution" and "Reception" sections in the guideline. Comments and suggestions are welcome below the text:
Release
editProvide information on the film's release, expanding upon the information in the infobox where necessary. Do not include information on the film's release in every territory (see above). Include details of notable festival appearances, special screenings and setups (e.g. digital, IMAX), and significant release date changes, with sourced commentary where appropriate. Relevant marketing information can be included in this section, or in a subsection should the coverage warrant it. After the film's release, include the following information:
Theatrical
editProvide a summary of the film's commercial performance. Report box office grosses in the film's national currency if possible. If sufficient coverage exists, it is recommended that this information is placed in a "Box office performance" or "Theatrical run" section. In addition to worldwide box office statistics, this section may detail specific results of opening weekends, results from different English-speaking territories, the number of theatres the film was released into, and audience demographics. Coverage of a notable opening in a country not of the film's origin may be included (e.g., an article on an American film set in China may include discussion of the film's performance in that country). Box office statistics can be sourced from dedicated tracking websites such as Box Office Mojo, The Numbers and Box Office Guru, or print publications such as Variety or The Hollywood Reporter. Determine a consensus from objective (retrospective if possible) sources about how a film performed and why.
Home media
editIf available, provide information on the film's release on home media, such as release dates, revenues, and other appropriate third-party coverage. The section may contain a summary of the extras included with the release, though excessive detail is to be avoided. If supported by filmmaker or third-party analysis, descriptions of deleted scenes included with the release should be placed in the "Production" section; the reason for the footage's removal is the relevant element, not the medium. Include an image of the medium's display case only if it is accompanied by critical commentary.
Critical reception
editReliable sources should be used to determine how the film was received. For films, sources that are regarded as reliable are professional film critics, though notable persons or experts connected to the topics covered by the film may also be quoted. The use of print reviews is encouraged. Commentary should also be sought from reliable sources for critics' general consensus of the film. These will be more reliable in retrospect; closer to the release, review aggregate websites such as Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic should be cited for statistics pertaining to the ratio of positive to negative reviews (caution: reliable review statistics may not be available for older films. Appraise the sample size in conjunction with other reliable sources, using best judgment to determine consensus). In order to maintain a neutral point of view, it is recommended to quote a reasonable balance of these reviews. This may not always be possible or desirable (e.g. films that have been almost universally acclaimed or panned), and best judgment should again be used.
It is recommended that reviews are used from the film's country of origin (e.g., Canadian reviews for a Canadian film, Australian reviews for an Australian film), though evaluations from several English-speaking territories are desirable. In the case of films not in the English language, the section should contain quotes translated into English from non-English reviews. For older films, seek reviews both from the period of the film's release and the present in order to determine if a film's initial critical reception varies from the reputation it has today. Do not quote comments from members of the general public (e.g. user comments from Amazon.com, the Internet Movie Database or personal blogs), as they are self-published and have no proven expertise or credibility in the field. Polls of the public carried out by a reliable source in an accredited manner may be used. Do not include user ratings submitted to websites such as the Internet Movie Database or Rotten Tomatoes, as they are vulnerable to vote stacking and demographic skew.
Comments
editPlease leave your comments and suggestions below. ~~~~