Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Golden Film

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Contents

[edit] Golden Film

The article is assessed as GA-class since January 2007. I would like to use this peer review to find out what improvements (if any) are needed to reach A-class. – Ilse@ 00:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 08:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the lead is a good summary of the article. There is no infobox available. I changed the heading "The Golden Film trophy" into "Trophy" to dealing with the WP:MSH problems. – Ilse@ 10:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Macca7174

  • needs better paragraphing. Many are too long and address several different points.
  • Doesn't say if there is a ceremony to award the trophies.
  • THe translated criticism is in very bad English. This needs to be addressed somehow.
  • IMDb isn't an ideal source of information, since its origins are from a usenet group. I'm not sure if that makes it inadequate, just not ideal.--Macca7174talk 22:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I changed the heading "Background" into "History" and put the elements in a more chronological order. I think this way the first point is dealt with. The second point is useful commentary. Since the awards are presented throughout the year, it seems that there is no ceremony. But there is no explicit mentioning of a ceremony or no ceremony in the sources I've consulted. I will try address the third point by rewriting the quotes. Referring to the fourth point, IMDb is currently not used as a source for the article. – Ilse@ 10:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed the translations of the quotations on some points. – Ilse@ 11:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't write 300 thousand- write 300,000
  • Has the been no response to Rob Houwer and Ronald Ockhuysen from the Netherlands Film Fund regarding their criticism of the award 'for flops'. It seems quite a harsh criticism, considering only about eight films a year are hitting the required milestone.

--Macca7174talk 13:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I changed 300 thousand into 300,000. – Ilse@ 20:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't think there was an official response to the "harsh criticism". – Ilse@ 19:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Arnoutf

General: Looks good. The prose could be improved to achieve a better flow of the article - a proof read by a native speaker of English would help (not me, as I am Dutch myself)
Introduction:

  • "Critics of the award say that films selling only as few tickets as the number needed to receive the Golden Film are not successful." - This is a very cryptic sentence; please rephrase

History section:

  • General, this section mixes background (first few lines) with history. History does not seem to cover it all either
  • 3rd line opens with "It" be very careful using it's and theses, that ay easily lead to confusion (suggestion: replace it with Golden Film)
  • "The Golden Film was announced on September 4, 2001 as an award for the first 75,000 visitors of a Dutch film production, together with the Platinum Film for the first 200,000 visitors." This line makes no sense, it seems as if the award is given to the first 75,000 visitors - consider rephrasing (as an award for a Dutch film production that attracted more than 75,000... )
  • Next line "The initiators use the terms...." not clear why this is relevant, should either be deleted or better embedded/introduced
  • "During the first years of the award, the public interest for Dutch film productions in the Netherlands increased." - sentence sounds like bad prose (but me not being native English have no suggestions)
  • "In 2003 the condition for the award was changed, according to the Netherlands Film Fund, to continue to stimulate the Dutch film industry." - bad flow - consider something like "The Netherlands Film Fund changed the number of visitors to achieve to award in 2003 in an effort to further stimulate Dutch movie industry"
  • "In 2007...." - Was the Diamind film created for that occasion or was it already somewhere decided to a million would win that prize??

Trophy section: Ok there is no annual ceremony, but how is the presentation done, is it just sent by mail, does the director go to the house of the winner, or is the winner invited to a party. Please expand this is bit. Also a photo of the trophy would go nicely here (but then, no reason to copy the top photo)
Response section

  • This is more a critisism than a response section, consider renaming
  • Opening sentence reads very difficult. It would help to name the actual number e.g. "Critis say that a movie selling only 100,000 (previously even 75,000) tickets, and thus being awarded a Golden Film, is not a successful movie, and thus not deserving of a prize." (or something like that)
  • This section would benefit greatly from a response to the critics (e.g. by the Film Fund)

List of awarde films - consider using (large) bold text for the years instead of subheadings (look at the content table)
I hope this helps - good luck Arnoutf 15:49, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I changed the wording of the last sentence of the introduction. – Ilse@ 19:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed the structure of the article and put several sentences of the history section in other words. – Ilse@ 22:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I have changed the text about the ceremony. I haven't found many sources that give information about the ceremony, only a video about the presentation of the Golden Film for Black Book. A screenshot from the video wouldn't qualify as fair use, because it would fail non-free content criterion #8 on "Significance". – Ilse@ 22:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed the heading and the wording of the first sentence of the criticism section. I haven't found any sources with a response to the critics. The initiators say the award is to stimulate sales, the critics say it is not yet a reward of sales; so maybe (in some way) they even agree. – Ilse@ 22:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I think the list of films is too long to remove the subsections; I think it's useful to be able to go to the particular section from the TOC. – Ilse@ 22:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Iridescent

The following question was posted on Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. I copied the text here for completeness. – Ilse@ 21:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I would like to ask an English native speaker to check the article Golden Film on language and flow. The article has been peer reviewed in order to become A-class and this is the last remaining task of the current comments. Your help is most welcome! – Ilse@ 19:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

My only comments would be:
  1. Change the "for the first 100,000 cinema tickets sold" in the lead paragraph to something along the lines of "selling over 100,000 cinema tickets" or "once it has sold 100,000 tickets" to make it clearer.
  2. Clarify somewhere whether all 100,000 tickets need to be sold in the Netherlands - if a Dutch film was unsuccessful domestically, but popular in another country, would it qualify?
  3. Clarify what criteria a film needs to meet to qualify (would an English-language film filmed in the Netherlands qualify? A Dutch-language film filmed in Belgium, Suriname etc?)
  4. I can't see any particular stylistic or grammatical problems in the article itself, although some of the sections could possibly do with expanding.
  5. Finally, I don't like the sentence "The Golden Film should bring good news about a film when the media attention for the film's release has stopped" as it's a bit unclear - does it mean that the award is intended to bring the film more publicity, or just intended to give the film's achievement official recognition — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Concerning 1, 3, and 5: I changed the wording to deal with the unclarities you pointed out, based on your suggestions
Concerning 2: the award section gives the information.
Concerning 4: great!
Thank you for your comments! – Ilse@ 21:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I assessed the article as A-class. – Ilse@ 21:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)