Talk:51 Birch Street

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Start

This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-Importance on the importance scale.

Editing Guidelines

Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article:

If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film)
- For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)
When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references.
Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.

It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

An entry from 51 Birch Street appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 23 January 2007.

[edit] POVish

This is a good subject for an article; it's the sort of notable-but-obscure subject that Wikipedia is such a great resource for learning about. But I have a problem with these two sentences:

What begins as an intimate, autobiographical story, soon evolves into a broader meditation on the universal themes of love, marriage, fidelity and the mystery of family. Unlike some other recent memoir documentaries, such as Capturing the Friedmans and Tarnation, it does't reveal terrible secrets or extreme dysfunction. Instead, 51 Birch Street explores more subtle forms of repression, secrecy and denial, and confirms that marriage is also among the most complex and mysterious.

This sounds like the words of a movie critic, not an encyclopedia editor. Reading it, my eyes starting dancing around looking for evidence of a citation or quoation marks indicating where it had come from. If this is a paraphrase from a movie critique, it should be cited. If not, it should be replaced with language with a more appropriate tone. Thanks. Shaundakulbara 01:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)