Talk:Full Frame Documentary Film Festival

Promotional text and poor sourcing
I tagged this article recently for some problems and left some other tags off that would have been appropriate but probably overkill.

The text in many places reads like an advertisement for the festival by using WP:PEACOCK wording. To fit with Wikipedia style (and encyclopedia articles in general) that has to be toned down a lot.

IT looks like most if not all of the article has been written by accounts or IP addresses whose only real purpose on Wikipedia has been to write about this topic. This is undoubtedly a conflict of interest. I did not tag it because that's usually assumed when the advertising tag is there.

There is only one source used for the entire article, and it was only used in two places. Of the two sentences the source was cited for, one was for being a premiere documentary film festival in the United States and one was for a list of names of famous people who had attended. There was nothing in the article cited to support the claim of being one of the premier documentary film festivals, and, frankly, since the source cited is just a local alternative newspaper it's not the kind of source we want to see to try to back up the claim for something being known at a national level. Also, a number of names on the list of past attendees were not listed in that source, so they have been commented out.

Nothing else in the entire article is supported by any references. That's not good. Certainly most of it would theoretically be able to be referenced, so I didn't just remove it all or put the article up for deletion. If this festival is as big as the article hypes it to be, there ought to be a large number of reliable sources to choose from. Hell, if the New York Times was a sponsor previously, as the local tabloid paper article states, then you'd think it would have published something about it.

The article needs a lot of work yet. DreamGuy (talk) 15:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)