Template:Did you know nominations/Gravity (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 02:38, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Gravity (film)[edit]

Improved to Good Article status by Captain Assassin! (talk), Facetoface333 (talk). Nominated by Captain Assassin! (talk) at 03:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC).

  • Article and hook seem okay overall, but the cast section is largely uncited, and QPQ is not done. -Zanhe (talk) 05:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry for not mentioning the QPQ before, but it's here now. And about the cast cited, it's not necessary as the article is recently GA passed. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 03:35, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the QPQ. Regarding the cast, the DYK guidelines state that only the Plot section does not need citations, and nothing about the Cast. I've posted a question on Wikipedia talk:Did you know, and will wait for an answer. By the way, passing the GA review does not necessarily mean the article meets all DYK requirements. -Zanhe (talk) 06:33, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
  • MOS:FILM specifically states that "Since the film is the primary source and the infobox provides details about the film, citing the film explicitly in the plot summary's section is not necessary." No such caveat is provided for the cast, so I would say that per Wikipedia's guidelines, this needs to be referenced appropriately. The fact that it has passed GA recently is irrelevant to judging whether it meets DYK guidelines, except for qualifying it for consideration in the first place. Harrias talk 08:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for adding the sources. "The most awarded" in the hook sounds awkward to me, maybe "more than any other film"? -Zanhe (talk) 19:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Article is new enough (recent GA), long enough, and well referenced. Hook is supported with inline refs. QPQ is done. Spot checking does not show close paraphrasing. Good to go. -Zanhe (talk) 23:25, 5 December 2014 (UTC)