Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tenebrae (film)

Tenebrae (film)[edit]

an early 1980s italian whodunit/slasher film by legendary director dario argento. the article is on a par with existing FAs on individual films, covering it throughly from all perspectives in a comprehensive and neutral manner. the sources for the major assertions are the world's most acknowledged argento experts: mcdonagh, jones, lucas, so very reliable and easily verifiable. any other bold assertions are inline-cited. peer review suggested lack of detail so article was massively expanded in response. the film is not argento's most famous or influential so info regarding its legacy remains somewhat scarce, but i think it does a good job summarizing what is out there. appears to be well-written, i copyedited the article (not written by me) and found very few things i needed to change.

Support per nom Zzzzz 10:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks good. You could consider converting the footnotes to the new style. —Wh o uk (talk) 11:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. An excellent example of a movie article. I could only imagine that very minor things could be wrong,but I don't see them. RyanG e rbil10 12:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per above. Dwaipayanc 13:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As good as November. Batmanand | Talk 14:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent article on a movie I'd never heard of. I edited the one thing that bothered my out (describing the ribbon in the London Underground poster as a "pretty red ribbon"). Staxringold 14:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Made me want to watch the movie! Well-balanced, seems to cover all the bases. The Disco King 16:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rama's Arrow 16:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Шизомби 02:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. However, I too would suggest using the cite.php format instead of the old format.--Fallout boy 04:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional~~ support. I would like a reference as evidence that this movie was a box office hit in Europe. While not a deal-breaker in my support, I would like to see the notes formatted as references and put in a references section, rather than a notes section. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll start working on reformatting the footnotes, since three of you have indicated you'd prefer they were in the new format. And I'll see if I can locate a reliable reference indicating the film's box office success.Hal Raglan 13:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- So far, an online search for supportive evidence (i.e., exact dollar amounts) regarding the film's box office success in Italy and Europe has been unproductive. I've rewritten the offending portions of the article to remove this unsourced detail. Please advise if the article now can receive your unconditional support. As far as the notes/references reformatting issue, thats going to take some time, and some real patience on my part, but I'll get to it.Hal Raglan 15:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Footnotes have now been reformatted as requested.Hal Raglan 04:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks. One other suggestion to do with the references: the URLs themselves don't need to be displayed. I'd suggest using the various cite templates (e.g. {{cite web}}) to make them consistent with other articles. I'll try to find time to help. —Wh o uk (talk) 10:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done! Thanks for your very helpful assistance in reformatting the footnotes.Hal Raglan 22:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unconditional support now. Offending section is longer there (please double check, I think it was mentioned twice in the article). - Mgm|^(talk) 21:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It was indeed mentioned twice, in the lead and in the "Response" section, and I have rewritten both sections accordingly. Thanks!Hal Raglan 21:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]