Talk:Eyes Without a Face (film)/GA1

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

Hi, I am reviewing your article, Eyes Without a Face, for GA. I lightly copy edited it for grammar and MoS issues, so please check through and make sure I have not altered the meaning. Your article is very good and I only see s few problems. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 01:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * All the direct quotes, anything in quotation marks, must have a reference source. For example, in the Release and reception there are many review quotes from publications but they are not referenced to the publication. For example, "The Spectator called it "the sickest film since I started film criticism." needs a reference. Also, the period after "criticism" should be outside the quotation mark as the part quoted is not a complete sentence. (In contrast - Franju responded, "Now I know why Scotsmen wear skirts." - is correctly punctuated, as the quotation is a complete sentence.)
 * I think I fixed these all now. I'm a terrible writer, but go over these again to make sure they are good! Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Edits in the Dr. Faustus version removed parts of the heterografting scene as well as scenes showing Doctor Génessier's more human side such as him lovingly caring for a small child at his clinic." - this needs to be something like - showing Doctor Génessier's more human side such his loving care for a small child at his clinic. - or words you like more.
 * Fixed using your wording. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "The distributors recognized the artistic intent of the film and played up that element in promotion with an advertisement quoting The London Observer's boasts of the film having "A ghastly elegance that suggests Tennessee Williams..." and its showing at the Edinburgh Film Festival." - The quotes need to be referenced. - Also, "and its showing at the Edinburgh Film Festival." - it is not clear what this means. The London Observer boasted of its showing at the film festival? Or did the advertisement mention that it was shown at the festival?
 * I've referenced these best I can. I'm using google book search for a lot of these books and some pages are hidden so I can't find the exact article I'm quoting, but I can use the one's written in the book. I've cited these though now. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "This quote is used again in the American film trailer as well as the narrator comparing the film to the acclaimed German expressionism film The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920)" - not clear here what is meant.
 * Took out, cleaned up, was ugly in the first place. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Comparisons to the style of French poet and filmmaker Jean Cocteau and early silent cinema were also made." - this is vague and in the passive voice. It would be better to say who made these comparisons and reference it.
 * added direct quotes and citations with this. 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "A negative review of the film came from Variety..." - Variety gave it a negative review - this gets it out of the passive voice plus you need a reference to Variety.
 * done and done.Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand why you have the image of the recording under Soundtrack but could you figure out a way of formatting it so that it does not disfigure the References?
 * moved this to a section above Legacy (and to put it closer to the release of home video section, which makes more sense in my mind). Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, I have not checked all the references yet, but the references to allmovie ((( La Tête Contre les Murs > Production Credits ))) need to have the () removed from the title. Ideally, all the references should be in a consistent format.
 * I cleaned that up. They should be okay now! Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I may add more comments. Feel free to contact me with comments or questions. This is a very interesting article on a fascinating film!

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 01:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - I don't get the parenthesis in this sentence: The Encyclopedia of Horror Films noted, "Franju invests [the film] with a weird poetry in which the influence of Cocteau is unmistakable. (scenes, for instance, in which Scob wafts through the house in a waxen mask of eerie beauty)."
 * How is the quote supposed to go? &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 18:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, The ISBN for The Encyclopedia of Horror Movies that I find on the web is consistently ISBN 0060550503 for the 1986 edition. Is that correct? &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 18:48, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That seems to correct by my check. I also fixed that quote. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Just one last request! Could you expand the lead a little? A few sentences from Release and reception Perhaps include a few sentences on its release and re-release when its critical status was re-evaluated. Perhaps apparent influence of Cocteau or whatever to give a flavor of the critical reviews. Also perhaps some words on its Legacy, like its critical acclaim and  that directors like Jesús Franco and John Carpenter were influenced. Whatever you think is appropriate. The lead should include a little from these sections on impact and legacy.  &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 19:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Expanded the lead! Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I added a little to the lead but feel free to change it. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 16:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Final GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Very well written in an engaging style. b (MoS): No MoS gaffs detected.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): The sources are reliable  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers the necessary material well. b (focused): Remains focused on the appropriate content.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: It is NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

This is a wonderful article and passes GA. Congratulations! &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 16:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)