Wikipedia:Peer review/Gremlins/archive1
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Peer review/Gremlins)
Just something I've been putting some work into, reorganizing, researching and expanding. I've never worked so much on a film article before, so I was wondering if there's anything missing, anything that needs to be changed and what can be done to make it featured status. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 21:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- There are a few links in the See also section (Night Skies & Petshop of Horrors) that should have info on them in the main article (most likely in the Legacy section). Also, try to expand small sections or merge them together; many subsections are not really needed at the moment, and would work better combined. -- LGagnon 23:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- I tried expanding on the box office info. Do you think the novelization and merchandizing sections should be combined? Or do you not like the way Production is divided? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 01:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Going based on current sizes, I'd recommend merging Novelization into Merchandise, Box office into the Reaction section (maybe renaming it "Critical reaction & box office"), and get rid of the subsectioning in the Production section. As a note for the future, you should never section/subsection a single paragraph unless there is a very good reason to do so (usually when there's not enough info for the section yet). -- LGagnon 01:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think the quote in the production section needs to be intended, it is too short. Having dot points in the middle of the reception section does not look that good. You might want to add a wikiqoute link and/or setup that page on wikiquote. I'm not sure if there needs to be the year in brackets after every film, but you may want to check what is standard with that. Good luck. Cvene64 12:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I can't say I liked the list either. It seems to have been a copy and paste from here, although I don't think that's copyrightable. I like the years on the films, though; helps establish context. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 19:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Cool. There is no problem with the years anyway, I was just kind of asking what is standard. Anyway, will you go to FAC soon?Cvene64 06:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'm still in the process of digging up stuff. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 23:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Cool. There is no problem with the years anyway, I was just kind of asking what is standard. Anyway, will you go to FAC soon?Cvene64 06:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I can't say I liked the list either. It seems to have been a copy and paste from here, although I don't think that's copyrightable. I like the years on the films, though; helps establish context. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 19:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments on my article. I think Gremlins in headed in the right direction. My only objection would be to shorten the plot section
considerably. As a general rule I try to limit it to 3-5 brief paragraphs and one image. Keep up the good work. Dmoon1 00:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)- Shorten it for the benefit of what though? It's not an overly long article, and the plot's not as detailed as it could be; much of the stuff is referred to later and is useful to understanding the rest of the article. We need to know what the mother does to those gremlins, for instance. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 00:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- I mispoke before. The plot is certainly not the longest I've seen, and it's almost just right (IMHO). It's just that all the film FAs have shorter plot section (except maybe Ran (film)). Some people have a tendency to go way over board, but this article doesn't. I can live with two pictures, and I like the gremlin eating the gingerbread man, but could you use a better picture of a mogwai if you can find one? If not it's ok (I looked and couldn't). I found this image of a revised 1984 Gremlins poster that could be used to illustrate the section on the ratings debate. I think the original poster was edited to illustrate that this film was not just about cute, furry little creatures. Dmoon1 12:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- I've tried shortening it a bit. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 08:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- I mispoke before. The plot is certainly not the longest I've seen, and it's almost just right (IMHO). It's just that all the film FAs have shorter plot section (except maybe Ran (film)). Some people have a tendency to go way over board, but this article doesn't. I can live with two pictures, and I like the gremlin eating the gingerbread man, but could you use a better picture of a mogwai if you can find one? If not it's ok (I looked and couldn't). I found this image of a revised 1984 Gremlins poster that could be used to illustrate the section on the ratings debate. I think the original poster was edited to illustrate that this film was not just about cute, furry little creatures. Dmoon1 12:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Shorten it for the benefit of what though? It's not an overly long article, and the plot's not as detailed as it could be; much of the stuff is referred to later and is useful to understanding the rest of the article. We need to know what the mother does to those gremlins, for instance. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 00:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- I tried expanding on the box office info. Do you think the novelization and merchandizing sections should be combined? Or do you not like the way Production is divided? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 01:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Also, theres not really a lot of info on the cast, theres the infobox, and a mention of Feldman winning an award, but thats about it. Also, in regards to shortening the plot and images, I wouldnt, think both images are important and I 'm not a fan of all of making plots really short. Cvene64 00:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, besides the main paragraph about Cates and Galligan, I guess I could add some more stuff about Galligan being excited about getting the role, and about Hoyt Axton... all that would come from the DVD extras though, which have already been cited lots. Is that what you had in mind? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm maybe I overestimated would should be there. I wouldn't worry about, my bad. Just a quick question, is that the original film poster? Cvene64 07:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- No it's not, it's the first DVD cover (although I think it goes back a little earlier than that, maybe to the video or a book cover or something). This more cryptic one is the original poster. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 08:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I would probably change it then, because its usually the way to go to use the original poster. Although I must admit I'am more familiar with the current one. 13:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I tried; for some reason the computer I'm on now can't upload pictures. I also tried taking some screenshots of the making of Gremlins; my computer won't let me upload those either. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 00:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)Never mind. Note to self, try reading the how to upload page before trying to upload. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:17, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I would probably change it then, because its usually the way to go to use the original poster. Although I must admit I'am more familiar with the current one. 13:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- No it's not, it's the first DVD cover (although I think it goes back a little earlier than that, maybe to the video or a book cover or something). This more cryptic one is the original poster. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 08:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm maybe I overestimated would should be there. I wouldn't worry about, my bad. Just a quick question, is that the original film poster? Cvene64 07:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, besides the main paragraph about Cates and Galligan, I guess I could add some more stuff about Galligan being excited about getting the role, and about Hoyt Axton... all that would come from the DVD extras though, which have already been cited lots. Is that what you had in mind? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
:Ok cool. Also, it could be a good idea to include the dvd cover/more well known cover in the legacy section, since a lot of people identify with it. Also, I'm not 100% sure, so you may want to check, but I think all the screenshots have to be a lower resolution (not just the page, but the actual image). I might have to double check that, but in any case, it wont make too much difference to the article, if you just re-uploaded the same image which is just a little bigger than its article size.Cvene64 06:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
- Don't wory about this. I think the images are fine. They are already low-resolution. Cvene64 01:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- Huh? I didn't upload any screenshots for this; how would you make them low resolution? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 06:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
- About the cover art. There is this poster which seems to be the original/more well known one, possibly a VHS cover. If you wanted, you could use that, as opposed to having both posters in the article. Just letting you know. Good luck with the article Cvene64 09:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- I can't see the picture in that website. It comes up as a small square with a website address on it. But note the pictures at IMDb [1] which indicate the one used now is the original, and Stripe didn't come into the picture until the film was rereleased in 1985. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 19:05, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- Dont worry about it, its all good the way it is now. Sorry if I have been making bad suggestions, but yes, it is good as it is now! Great work. Cvene64 22:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think you've been making bad suggestions. I do plan to add a little more about the cast. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- Dont worry about it, its all good the way it is now. Sorry if I have been making bad suggestions, but yes, it is good as it is now! Great work. Cvene64 22:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- I can't see the picture in that website. It comes up as a small square with a website address on it. But note the pictures at IMDb [1] which indicate the one used now is the original, and Stripe didn't come into the picture until the film was rereleased in 1985. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 19:05, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- Note I think I have now expanded it as much as I can. Any more suggestions? CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 22:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- The Music section (and a few other parts) has some extremely short stubby paragraphs. Try to expand these into full paragraphs. -- LGagnon 16:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)