Talk:Another Cinderella Story/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

I'm afraid I'm failing this article's GA nomination. There are a number of significant issues which need to be fixed before the article can be promoted:

The introduction doesn't adequately summarise the entire contents of the article (read WP:LEAD)
The plot section should be a somewhat detailed recount of all of the film's events, not just a brief synopsis
There should be a "Production" section, describing how the film was made
Some information is missing references, such as for soundtrack CD sales
The references should be correctly formatted (read WP:REF/ES)
Subheadings should be laid out in an order similar to MOS:FILM (that page will give you a thorough explanation of what each subheading should contain, too)

These are just the main issues; there are also some smaller problems, such as grammar and formatting. You should have a look at other GA-class film articles (Category:GA-Class film articles) to see what a good article should look like, in addition to MOS:FILM. When you think that you've fixed all of the problems above, you should re-nominate the article at GAN. Good luck with improvements. —97198 (talk) 07:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot expansion redux[edit]

The GA review mentioned multiple things wrong, and I agree with all of them except the plot. If you want to go for GA, then fix the rest of them, and go for review again. The plot summary we currently have is adequate. An 1800 word one was ridiculous.—Kww(talk) 02:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]