Talk:Final Destination (film)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: That Ole Cheesy Dude ^{(Talk to the hand!)} 20:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decided to review this because it's been up for 2 months! I am sorry however, because I'm a pretty thorough reviewer...

The article has quite a few prose problems (mentioned below). It is very extensive, covers a lot of the subject, but has a few reference problems (also mentioned below). If all of the problems are fixed, the article should be good to go. Feel free to strikethrough the options you've completed. Great work, you just need to a little bit more great work and it'll be GA before you know it.

"It also received", just "It received" because no awards have been mentioned yet and it helps prose.

The film's success led to a successful..." Entire sentence needs rewording (repetition of success and the "it" is clunky) to "The film's success spawned four sequels, FD2 (03)...

Before Volée Air Flight 180's take-off. Reword, I don't know what that means. It also repeats the word take-off.

Remove the third "take-off" in two setences; "before the plane leaves?"

"...celebrating that it is all over and they are finally in Paris." Confusing, needs rewording.

"standing. the" Capital!!

"Zide/Perry Productions producers" seems clunky, try rewording.

"The role of Alex Browning was the challenging part for the writers, since Alex should bring different kind of emotions throughout the film." POV? Needs a reference or removal.

"Morgan and Wong were still not sure to hire him" Doesn't make grammatical sense.

"so they wanted him to perform again as they review his previous works" Same sentence, tense confusion.

"Morgan was amazed by his performance in Idle Hands, and Sawa was hired." Reference plox.

"and their just "crap"." in the quote. Their should be they're!

Devon Sawa on how he was amazed by... Needs to be a bit more neutral: "Devon Sawa on the script of Final D"

"he has some quite few friends" It's a quote so he might have said that, if he did leave it, but it doesn't make sense...

"her death scene (which is being rammed by a speeding bus)" doesn't need the "which is"

"The plane scene (where passengers die in mid-air)" Brackets unneeded. Preferably remove them.

"It can be tilted sideways from 30-degrees to 60-degrees down to make the scenes appear as an actual plane was about to derail." Tense change, it could be...

"was one of the hardest parts shot" to: "was one of the hardest scenes to shoot"

"make sure that there is no real sheet metal in the car for the safety of the actors" there was. Tense change.

This will be a weird one but: try alternating the image placements, from right to left and left to right for every image apart from the poster, it will make the layout better and it won't break up the chapters in the way it does at the moment.

Link Review aggregate to review aggregator.

In reception Final Destination is not italicized.

"Final Destination will no doubt be a hit and inspire the obligatory sequels. Like the original "Scream", this movie is too good to be the end of the road. I have visions of my own." This is quoted twice! From 2 different sources! Once from Chicago, once from Roger Ebert. Which is it from? Fix this fast, I'm starting to have doubts.

Optional: Do you think you could create a table documenting the awards underneath the text? You don't have to, but it'd look really good on the page.

References need some work: Ref 20 is from YouTube, from an unreliable user and the video may be in breach of copyright, it should not be a reference on Wikipedia. Ref 21 is from IMSDB and is unreliable, should be removed. Refs 53 and 54 are from IMDB, remove them, they are not reliable sources.

Reference formats: All references should be formatted correctly, such as all date formats being the same: formats for ref 39 and ref 50 are different, choose which format you want and keep at that one.

Categories: Why does it have the categories "Weendigo Records albums" and "Shirley Walker albums". The article mentions nothing of the album, the cats should either be removed or the section should be added.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Prose needs some work (per above), once changes are made, both of these should be a "pass".
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Some references need replacing or removal, but everything else is okay.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Perfic'.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
One POV problem.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Perfic'.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Perfic'.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

That Ole Cheesy Dude ^{(Talk to the hand!)} 20:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well... that's a lot of changes! However, they're all right and I guess I'm going to be full-handed in the next couple of days. Nonetheless, I still have school to attend so I might not be able to work on the whole article thoruoughly. Cheers! FD Joshua 22 09:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've striked those changes which I already applied in the article. For those unstriked, I'm gonna work on that later since I have to attend a certain meeting. Oh, and I'm not quite sure of making a table for the accolades since the film received only a handful of awards and I think making a table is quite unnecessary. But if you suggest, I'll make one if it suits the article well. FD Joshua 22 10:53, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind what I said. The article is fixed. FD Joshua 22 07:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's great work, but there are still 2 references from IMDB, which are not reliable sources, you should consider finding new sources for the provided information and removing the imdb refs. That Ole Cheesy Dude ^{(Talk to the hand!)} 08:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh... right! I forgot! I taught I was done already but I'll be up to it in just a while. FD Joshua 22 12:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References fixed. Not done with the table; however quantity of awards are not that plenty, meaning a table is unnecessary. FD Joshua 22 13:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant work! Okay, passed. That Ole Cheesy Dude ^{(Talk to the hand!)} 16:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]