Talk:Final Destination 3/GA1

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 15:47, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Grabbing this for a review. Aoba47 (talk) 15:47, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Review
 * Please add an ALT description for the image in the infobox. The same note applies to all of the images used in the body of the article itself.
 * Wait is that necessary? I've never seen that as a requirement before in GA nominations. If it is however I can come up with alternative descriptions.
 * An ALT description is used to help those with visual impairments and are separate from the captions. You can read about it here Manual of Style/Accessibility and it should be added to improve the article. Aoba47 (talk) 02:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You use the term "the first film" in close proximity in the lead. I would suggest just saying the original's full title in the first instance or do something else to avoid this repetition.
 * The sentence in the lead about the award nominations does not need a reference as it should be supported in the body of the article. I would suggest pulling out the quotes from the lead about the critical reception and paraphrasing it in your own words, but this is a personal preference and more up to your taste on this one.
 * I guess the problem here is that what people disliked about the film is the exact same thing others enjoyed about it. Show how critics described it seems to be the best way to go at it. And as an extra it fills a little space. :)
 * Makes sense. I would suggest removing the references for the awards and interactive movie though as that should already be covered in the body of the article. Aoba47 (talk) 15:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The sentence about the characters' names in the "Cast" section needs a citation.
 * The James Wong block quote needs a citation.
 * The final part of the first paragraph of the "Casting" subsection reads somewhat muddled to me. I think you are relying far too much on the quotes and the sentence construction of this section is quite odd and confusing. I always recommending paraphrasing unless the exact wording is vital to the meaning and I do not see how the quotes are absolutely necessary for a reader's understanding of this information.
 * Remove Ginger Snaps from the identifier of Kris Lemche as it is relevant to the article. You could move the Wikilink to Ginger Snaps in the next paragraph. It just sounds odd to me to identify an actor by a particular film in this context. I get that you want to emphasize that Lemche and Moss have appeared in this movie together in the past, but I am still not a fan of the "Ginger Snaps actor" identifier.
 * I am confused on why you are identify Lemche and Johnson as an actor and a singer, but you do not provide identifiers for other individuals such as Glen Morgan and Crystal Lowe. Also, why do you distinguish Johnson's nationality as you do not do that for any of the other actors. Consistency is very important.
 * The "Filming" subsection is so short that I would combine it with the "Effects" subsection immediately following it. I would call it "Filming and effects".
 * I do not find the "Music" section to be particularly relevant. They is nothing really notable about the soundtrack to justify having the entire track listing in this article. The first two sentence do not have any form of citations. I would provide citations for the first two sentences, move them up into the "Production" section somewhere appropriate, and remove the track listing and this section completely as it does nothing for the article and a reader's understanding of the material.
 * Do you have any more information about the film's release? One sentence about this seems rather small. Maybe information about its release in other countries? Comparisons with the releases of the previous two films? Information about the film's marketing?
 * I would combine the "DVD release" and "Digital release" subsections together.
 * Please complete the "Media data and Non-free use rationale" table for the image of Ashley's death. There are two spots with "n.a." that require further completion.
 * I think you rely too much on quotes in the "Reception" section. Paraphrase more and try to make this more of a cohesive narrative of the film's reception rather than a list of critics and quotes. I like how you broke up the paragraphs, with the aggregate information in the first paragraph, general criticism in the second paragraph, and character critiques in the third paragraph, but there is still a lot lacking in this section in particular. I would highly recommend looking at this resource to understand how to better craft a "Reception" section as they can be quite challenging.
 * Just a reminder that this is the only comment left unaddressed. Aoba47 (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for taking so long with the edits. I will make all the necessary edits left during the weekend. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is absolutely no rush. Take as long as you need (you can do after this weekend if you prefer). I just wanted to remind you so I apologize for the intrusion. Aoba47 (talk) 20:49, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I decided to put the reviews from negative to positive and trimmed them down. If needed, I could find more reviews. PanagiotisZois (talk) 10:53, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Avoid SHOUTING in the reference titles (see references 8 and 23 and 38 for examples). Do not put reference titles in all caps. Look through all of the references to catch this.
 * There are several publishers/works misidentified in the references. For instance, IGN and Yahoo! Movies should not be in italics. Please go through all of the references to fix this.
 * For the references I used Template:Cite Web, which asks me to identify the website name and places it by itself in italics.
 * I have fixed this for you. These titles should not be in italics. Aoba47 (talk) 15:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Final comments
 * Overall, you have done a wonderful job with the article. Once my comments are addressed, I will look through it again and provide more to my review. Aoba47 (talk) 01:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Make sure to ping me when you are completed with my review. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I will. And thank you so much for helping me with the review. FD3 is my favorite horror film and it was such a shame nobody had tried to improve the article. PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You have done a few wonderful job with this article. I think that I have covered pretty much everything in the review above. Good luck with the improvements! Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Just checking in about this. Aoba47 (talk) 02:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your responses. I will ✅ this. If you want to take this further, you will need to further the "Release" section and most likely add more to the "Reception" section. But, I believe that it meets the requirements for a GA. Aoba47 (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh my God. I still can't believe this. Thank you T_T. PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:36, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Anytime! Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)