Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/? (film)/archive1

• Resolved comments from Mark Arsten:
• Comments: _{Supported below}I peer reviewed this article a few weeks back, and thought it was in good shape then. A few more small comments/suggestions for now:
• I'd suggest removing the last sentence of the lead.

• Alright, no need for that much context in the lede (oughtta draw more people)

• "One of his employees is Menuk, who supports her unemployed husband Soleh in his search for a job." I'd consider removing "in his search for a job".

• Done.

• "Meanwhile, Rika feels stressed because of her treatment after converting to Catholicism from Islam; Surya and Doni (Glenn Fredly) are also competing for her affections. Abi is facing ostracism from neighbours, who disapprove of his mother's conversion. Surya is upset over his failure to find a good acting job." I'd suggest noting that the neighbours are behind Rika's treatment.

• How's this?

• "He rushes out with the bomb, which eventually explodes outside the church and away from worshippers; Soleh is killed." Is there a good way to tighten this sentence? Mark Arsten (talk) 18:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• How's this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• Fixes to initial comments look good, continuing now.
• "In a press conference, Bramantyo said that..." This might be too picky of me, but you might want to note if this was before or after the film was released.

• Done

• "while Bramantyo has called the film his own personal interpretation" I feel like you could add a few more words here, his own interpretation of?

• Done

• Just a suggestion, but you might think about giving Sasono his own paragraph in "Themes and style". (One for him, one for the others)

• I think it works better as it is now (grouping similar thematic and artistic commentary). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• The overlinking script is picking up drama film, might want to delink.

• I'd rather keep the link to the genre. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• "According to Bramantyo, the film was also screened in Vancouver and Paris, receiving positive feedback." I'm not sure you need to attribute this to him in text. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

From the peer review: "Can't find independent verification of Paris, all I could find is tweets for Vancouver. Just to be safe (a director could, theoretically, lie, right?)" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

lol, memory FAIL. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• Does the censorship board have an article? If so, might want to link it.

• Not yet.

• "with its depiction of inter-ethnic and interfaith tolerance reflecting Indonesia's "national character"." I'd suggest "and that its depiction of inter-ethnic and interfaith tolerance reflected Indonesia's "national character"", but not a major issue.

• I know, I know, verb-ing. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

RC from Grapple X

• Comments.

• As a general thing, "Cast" sections which simply offer further characterisation are best avoided (WP:CASTLIST offers a bit on this); if there's any relevant information on casting, critical discussion of the characters, or individual acting awards, etc, then it could be briefly mirrored here to increase the real-world relevance of the section.

• Hidden

• How's this? I think we should keep the religious leaders here as the priest gets further discussion later on. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• I'm not sure there's any benefit to File:Glenn Fredly.jpg straddling the section heading like it does; moving it up a paragraph or two will still leave it alongside the paragraph mentioning Fredly's involvement.

• Fair enough, done.

• "Revalina S. Temat, who had appeared in Bramantyo's 2009 film Perempuan Berkalung Sorban (The Girl With the Keffiyeh Around Her Neck), found her role as Menuk interesting, although more serious than her recent work in horror films." -> Here, "although" seems to suggest that the final clause is a counterpoint to what precedes it, when there doesn't seem to be such a counterpoint in what's borne out. I'd suggest replacing "although" with "as well as" or "and", something indicating addition without opposition. I might be rambling here.

• Your proposal is acceptable.

• "he further describes the camera angles as vulgar, abandoning subtlety, but suggests that they made the work more dramatic." -> Can this be expanded upon, to perhaps list which particular type of angle is being discussed? It's alright if this isn't in the sources.

• Will look into it.

• How's this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• "a local cellular provider" -> manufacturer or network?

• Network/service

• "Frans Sartono, reviewing in the historically Catholic daily Kompas" -> "reviewing in" reads oddly to me; perhaps "reviewing the film for" or just "writing for".

• For.

• The "Awards" heading might benefit from a little more prose; perhaps picking two or three of the most prominent of these awards and citing who the winning competition was would achieve this well.

• Will look into it.

• How's this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• Works for me. GRAPPLE X 04:49, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• Overall I think this one seems broad, well-written and engaging; I'm leaning towards backing it. GRAPPLE X 04:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)