From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Portal
|
Battlefield Baseball is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion. |
Start |
This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. |
Low |
This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. |
Assessment comments
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
|
|
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics 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. |
|
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)
- 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Battlefield Baseball was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Reviewed version: August 10, 2006
|
[edit] Failed "good article" nomination
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of June 14, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: OK, but needs some grammar and spellcheck work, as well as exansion.
- 2. Factually accurate?: OK, but needs more references for the information that is missing (see below)
- 3. Broad in coverage?: This article is not thorough. It should include promotion of the film, production costs and methods, how much the film made, any DVD release info, soundtrack info, a cast and crew listing and any anecdotes of note about the film. For a good example, see King Kong (2005 film)
- 4. Neutral point of view?: I can see than an effort was made to show point of view, but I added "citation needed" tags to two paragraphs that claim that critics or viewers felt a certain way about the movie, but then doesn't mention or reference proof of this.
- 5. Article stability? Stable, but actually needs more work.
- 6. Images?: Only one, but that is good enough, since most pics associated with movies are going to be copyrighted. You might be able to find an ad, but if not, that's ok.
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Esprit15d 14:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)