Talk:An Inconvenient Truth/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

I was going to put this on hold, but there are a lot of issues in there, so I'm going to fail it for now.


 * Comments:
 * I really dislike "Influences on popular culture" as many of them are incomplete and the references themselves are minor. If it is going to be kept, could you at least incorporate it into the reception section? While on the subject, is the image of Manbearpig really necessary?
 * While on the topic of images, image:AlGoreWin.jpg doesn't seem to illustrate anything specific in the article and could be removed.
 * Can the citations be removed from the lead? (per WP:LEAD) Although, I would be okay if they were left in, since I'm sure this is a controversial article.
 * The lead leaves much to be desired. Could another paragraph be added to it? (Maybe talking about how/why Gore became involved)
 * There are a lot of improperly formatted refs in there, quite a few are lacking publishers. Also, using IMDB as a source should be avoided.
 * The "Making of the film", and "origins" sections should be combined into a production section.
 * The reviews section is a tad small and should contain more critical opinions.
 * Could the awards section be shortened, or put into a collapsing table?
 * There are a lot of bulleted lists in this article. The one in the scientific basis section is okay, as is the list of "Best Documentary" awards (although it could be put into a table) but the rest should be put into prose form.
 * There are several instances in the article (noticeably in the "Criticism" section), where the opinion of a person is mentioned, but who that person is is not explained. Example: "Richard S. Lindzen wrote in a June 26, 2006 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that Gore was using a biased presentation to exploit the fears of the public for his own political gain." Who is Richard S. Lindsen? Just add a few words, ie. "atmospheric physicist Richard S. Lindzen ...."

So, the article has a good start and it reads well enough, but there still are issues. -- Scorpion 0422  18:55, 13 January 2009 (UTC)