Talk:Reboot (fiction)/Comments

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Stub class rating as of 2007-10-19

Severely defiencent for such an important article:

• No sources whatsoever, much less reliable ones
• Extensive original research and opining
• No coverage of history of the concept, history of the term (which is much, much later), significance/notability, effects, criticism, etc., etc.; does nothing but basically explain the concept and provide a list of rather random examples
• Not enough exploration of the concept's broader applicability, such as wild retellings of classics as modernistic or even sci-fi reboots (the Beowulf-in-space flick that Christopher Lambert did, various modernizations of Shakespeare in films over the last 20 years), historical reboots long before the age of film and comics, such as radical recastings of the entire Arthurian/Grail cycle; reboots in novel series (third-party reboots of Sherlock Holmes come to mind - Conan-Doyle did one himself! - as does the Young Sherlock Holmes film, which sharply reboots the canonical written material). Speaking of Conan (the barbarian this time), reboots from novels to movies are very, very, very common; so common that something useful as a source has almost certainly be written on the phenomenon from a film analysis point of view.
• General writing quality could improve. I worked on it a little to fix the most egregious WP:MOS violations and such.
• Almost all current editing attention seems to be on expanding lists (WP:TRIVIA danger) instead of actually improving the article. Ideally, the lists should be forked into a List of continuity reboots, as this fannish list expansion does absolutely nothing to move this article from Stub to even Start class.

Basically, this is written like it came from a fan forum/blog, not an encyclopedia. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 12:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC) (Note: I am not watchlisting this article or comments file, so any issue regarding these comments should be taken to my talk page.)