Talk:Hot Fuzz/GA1

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

As part of WikiProject Good articles' Project quality task force, I am re-reviewing this article to ensure compliance with current good article criteria. I have determined that it doesn't meet criteria for the reasons outlined below and needs a bit of work if it is to retain its status: I am placing the article on hold for seven days, longer if good efforts are made to addressing the above. Thanks, -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 02:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead section does not adequately summarize the entire article. There's next to nothing about production or much on summary of critical reaction, or even plot.
 * The lead has been expanded to touch on the various topics within the article. I removed some of the unrelated statements in the lead and moved them to within the article. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The plot is too long; it should be cut down to a more succinct and readable length.
 * Trimmed, let me know if you see any issues. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * There are a lot of one or two-line paragraphs, which aren't really paragraphs (examples: second paragraph of "script and locations", first paragraph of "homage", last paragraph of "filming". These either need to be cut, expanded, or merged if applicable.
 * Merged, expanded, or rearranged assorted brief paragraphs. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * While I'm on the subject, the formatting of the production section makes no logical sense, with postproduction coming before discussions about filming.
 * The layout has been changed, let me know if it needs further rotations. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Unsourced statements throughout, particularly home video and the end of the cast section. All these need reliable citations.
 * I removed many unsourced statements and added citations for others. A lot of information has snuck in here that I haven't paid attention to very closely in my watchlist. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing the article. I'm always glad to see one of my GAs swept from the list, and I still got a few left for reviewers to look at. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, much better, thanks for the quick response. -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)