Talk:Kung Fu Hustle/GA2

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

Reviewer: Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs) 02:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm reviewing this article. It's my practice to do a general review by filing out the template, and then do a more thorough prose and source review. See below. Note: I'm using this review for the GA Recruitment Centre, so I expect to be more descriptive of what I do during it. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria An interesting article about a topic I don't know much about--Chinese cinema--so it was fun to learn about it. There are some minor prose issues which should be easily resolved. At first glance, I notice that many of sources are from pop culture websites that not every reviewer would accept as reliable. However, given the subject matter and the need for comprehensiveness, I find them acceptable. See below for a more comprehensive prose and source review. Also at first glance, most of my concerns with this article have to do with MOS issues; also see below.
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * I have minor issues with the prose here; see below for a more thorough review.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * As I state above, I'm unfamiliar with Hong Kong cinema, so I looked around at other similar articles. Unfortunately, there aren't any Hong Kong action comedy film GAs to compare this with.  (Or fortunately, because this may the first!) ;) The closest I was able to find was The Killer (1989 film), which is a "Hong Kong action and crime film".  I have two MOS issues.  The first is the "Plot" section.  At about 600 words, it fits within the suggested length (400-700 words; see WP:FILMPLOT.  I'm not sure, though, if it's got enough of a a real-world perspective.  The Killer's article is a good example of a plot summary written from a real-world perspective; also see WP:Real world.  (I'll go into more examples and suggestions during my prose review.)  Finally, I'm not sure what I think about the "Parodies and references" section; it strikes me as too close to a "Trivia" section, which is generally forbidden.  See WP:TRIVIA.  Mind you, this is a guideline, and as it states, there are exceptions.  I can understand why this section is included in this article, since a theme in the film are the many references to other films, ect, as well as the source of much of its humor.  I wonder if the solution is to re-name the section; perhaps you should strike "Parodies" and just name it "References" or "References to other works".  Let me think about it a couple of days and see what I come up with.
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * It's good practice to check your sources, and make sure they're up-to-date and unbroken. I suggest that you go through them and update the access dates; it's a good idea if they're less than a year old.
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * I'm reserving judgment about this until I do a more thorough source review; see below.
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * I need to look more closely at your sources, which may not be the most reliable, although I recognize that sometimes one must abandon reliability for scope, especially for articles about movies. Of course, that often means that it may not have the potential to advance to FAC, and that may be the case here.
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * Checking the article history, there is little controversy here; it's edited by a few main editors. As a matter of fact, the last edit was 16 June.
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * I admit that I'm not the best judge of images, but I'm letting it pass since the criteria for GAs is less strict. I suggest getting a second opinion.  Are there any free images of any of the actors, producers, or writers?
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I'll reserve judgment for now, until after my prose and source review.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I'll reserve judgment for now, until after my prose and source review.
 * I'll reserve judgment for now, until after my prose and source review.

Prose review
Lead Plot
 * Kung Fu Hustle is a 2004 Hong Kong action comedy film directed, co-written and co-produced by, and starring, Stephen Chow. Breaks the parallel structure grammar rule.  How about breaking it up, like this: "Kung Fu Hustle is a 2004 Hong Kong action comedy film.  It was directed, co-written, and co-produced by Stephen Chow, who also had the lead role."
 * The other producers were Chui Po-chu and Jeffrey Lau, while the screenplay was co-written... "While", although it's a conjunction, isn't the best choice here because it implies that the screenplay was being co-written at the same time the movie was produced.  I'd simply replace it with "and".
 * After the commercial success of Shaolin Soccer, by the production company Star Overseas, they, together with Columbia Pictures Film Production Asia began to develop Kung Fu Hustle in 2002. Unclear sentence construction.  How about: "After the commercial success of Shaolin Soccer, its production company, Star Overseas, began to develop Kung Fu Hustle with Columbia Pictures Film Production Asia in 2002."
 * Although the film features the return of a number of retired actors famous for 1970s Hong Kong action cinema, it contrasts with other martial arts films released at around the same time that have made the biggest impact in the West, such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Hero. Unclear and too long; plus, it's unclear how the two phrases are connected.  How about: "The film features a number of retired actors famous for 1970s Hong Kong action cinema, yet has been compared to contemporary and influential martial arts films such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Hero."
 * I've already talked about the in-universe style of this section. As I stated above, I think that you should change it to be more like The Killers article.  For example, the first two sentence of the section are too dramatic for an encyclopedic article.  I think that if you changed the tone, many of the other prose issues would be resolved.  I can help you with this if you like, and can copy-edit it for you if you like.
 * As per Kelvin 101's request, I've copy-edited this section. I have one question: in the 3rd paragraph, who does Sing describe his childhood to?  Was it a flashback, and when did it happen?  Please clarify. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:55, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Christine there person who he is describing his childhood to is his friend "Bone" and yes it is indeed a flashback not sure on the when I might have to watch that bit of the film again Thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 12:14, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll go ahead and add that it's a flashback. Yah, I'm sure you wouldn't mind watching it again, at least that scene, since you're obviously a fan of the movie, right? ;)  The way you've worded it makes is seem that the flashback happened while he was in the pulpit, while being spontaneously healed.  Which sounds really odd. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Cast: Isn't "Kung Fu" always capitalized? If so, please change, not just here but throughout the article. Development Choreography
 * Major inspiration for the film came from martial arts films Chow watched as a child and his childhood ambition to become a martial artist. Passive voice, so I'd change it to active.  How about: "Chow was inspired to create the film by the martial arts films he watched as a child and by his childhood ambition to become a martial artist."
 * He grew up in an environment similar to the Alley... Where'd he grow up?  I think including that information is important, even for those of us who don't know China well.
 * He grew up in an environment similar to the Alley, and the plot included many aspects of his former daily life. The source doesn't say anything about his former daily life influencing the plot. It states: "The Pig Sty is exactly what I lived in the past, the same shape, same kind of building, same situations, a lot of people living together."  It's kind of an important statement, so I'd just quote him.
 * I think this section is misnamed; it's about more than just the choreography. As per the Film MOS, perhaps "Filming"?
 * Production suffered a setback when Hung quit... Unencyclopedic; how about just removing everything before "Hung quit"?
 * To replace Hung, Chow immediately contacted Yuen Woo-ping... I suggest that you avoid starting sentences with a preposition.  You don't need to say that Chow "immediately contacted" Woo-ping.  How about: Hung was replaced by Yuen Woo-ping..."
 * Yuen promptly accepted the offer, and certain scenes that had been in production under Hung were cancelled. Ref 13 supports the sentence before, but not this one.  I suggest that you either find a source or remove the sentence.  If you find a source, what scenes were cancelled?
 * Much of the second paragraph of this section reads choppy to me. I think that you need to vary the sentences and put them in different order.  For example, you could put the sentence about the CGI team's work on high resolution after the sentence introducing the company.  If you like, I can copy-edit the paragraph for you.
 * Copy-edited. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Casting
 * Kung Fu Hustle pays tribute to many celebrated veterans of Hong Kong action cinema of the 1970s. "Many celebrated veterans" is a bit peacocky to me.  I'd replace it with "several actors who became famous in..."
 * I think that this section suffers from some of the things I talked about before: unencyclopedic language and structural problems. I think you should go through and do a copy-edit to tighten up the language.  Again, I can copy-edit if you like.
 * Questions that came up during this section's copy-edit:
 * In spite of the film's success, he worried that nowadays fewer people practice martial arts. Was Wah concerned that the martial arts would die out because not enough people practice it?
 * It looks like refs 8 and 14 don't support the statements they're supposed to support. I know that ref 14 is in Chinese, but the English version says nothing about what Leung thought of Chow.  Ref 8 only says that Chow admired Leung, not that he did so as a child.  To be honest, this concerns me a bit, but due to the language issue, I'll assume good faith that you've integrated your sources better in the rest of the article. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Music: Does your sources explain the differences in the Chinese and American versions? If not, no biggie; I was just curious. Parodies and references
 * As I state above, I think you should change the name of this section.
 * Forgive my repetition, but this section also needs a thorough copy-edit to correct for some of the same issues I've mentioned above, especially structure. Again, I can help.
 * Questions:
 * What's the name of the actor who plays the clerk in this film and in Shaolin Soccer? If I knew, I could improve the sentence more. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Releases
 * Kung Fu Hustle had its world premiere at the 2004 Toronto International Film Festival. This is an international film, so you don't need to mention that this was its "world premiere".  You could just state that it premiered at the festival.
 * In the same way, the Italian and Spanish titles... In the same way as what?  I don't think you need that phrase; I suggest cutting it.

Reception Sequel: In 2005, Chow asserted that there would be a sequel... "Asserted" isn't the best choice here; how about "announced" or even "stated"?
 * Film critic Roger Ebert described the film as being "like Jackie Chan and Buster Keaton meet Quentin Tarantino and Bugs Bunny". The comment was printed on the promotion posters for Kung Fu Hustle in the US. Cool quote; Ebert was so awesome.  I think this would flow better if you combined these two thoughts.  How about: "Film critic Roger Ebert description of the film ("like Jackie Chan and Buster Keaton meet Quentin Tarantino and Bugs Bunny"), was printed on the promotion posters for Kung Fu Hustle in the US."
 * As often happens in "Reception" sections, this is a collection of quotes from reviews. I actually read the Ebert review; there's so much there you could have used, like that he made the above statement at Sundance; his comparisons of this film with ''Shaolin Soccer", "Singin' in the Rain", and Astaire and Rogers; his statements about choreography and martial arts.  That actually brings up another point for me; articles about movies should make me want to watch it.  To be honest, I didn't, until I read Ebert's review.  You need that same spirit here.  I'm not saying that you need to write as well as Ebert, although that's not a bad goal to set, since he was doing another kind of writing, but I am saying that it could improve here.
 * Much of the criticism for the film was directed at its lack of character development and a coherent plot. Las Vegas Weekly, for instance, criticised the film for the lack of a central protagonist and character depth. I suggest that you re-word these sentences, to vary the language a bit. "Lack of" is used too many times.

Online and PS3: This short section needs a copy-edit; it mixes tenses. I think that you should state that the game has not yet been released earlier.

Ok, that's it for now. I'll put a note on the nominator's talk page informing him of the review. You have a week (until 7/10) to respond to these comments; if there's no response (as was the case in its first GA), I'll fail it. Good luck! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Kelvin 101, this article's nominator, is responding to this review on his talk page, which isn't customary. As a result, I've struck-out the resolved comments here, and also will respond to his responses here.  On his talk page, he highlighted the unresolved comments; again, something I've never seen before and don't know what it means.  For the most part, though, I'm happy with his responses and improvements thus far. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, all done with my part. Even with the few issues/questions above, I think that this now satisfies the GA criteria. Will go pass now. Thanks for your openness to my suggestions. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Source review

 * According to WP:LEADCITE, it's unnecessary to include references in the lead, except to support exceptional and controversial claims, and for quotes. Nothing in the lead can be classified in that way, so I suggest that you remove them.  Of course, that means that you're going to have to redistribute them.  I checked for source links for a few, to make sure that nothing was broken, and they were good.  I have some issues with how some of them are utilized; for example, ref 6 just states that the Hong Kong Chinese Orchestra performed the film's soundtrack, not the type of music.  The point is somewhat moot, anyway, since you make the same claim later on and support it with a different ref.
 * Ref 1 is formatted incorrectly; the article's URL and Box Office Mojo belong in different tags. Use the WP:CIT templates.
 * Ref 4: Using IMBD is frowned upon. I suggest that you remove it, since it doesn't support any claims anyway.
 * Ref 20: What are the question marks for? Make sure that you've formatted your refs correctly.
 * Some of the refs are in Chinese. I don't speak it, so I'm assuming good faith (AGF) that you've incorporated them correctly (i.e., no close paraphrasing, they support your claims).
 * I agree with the tag; ref 47 (IMBD) is unreliable. Please remove content or find a more reliable source. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Kung Fu/ Kung fu Capitalisation
Hi, I have do some research on the word "Kung Fu" and I have found the only time the first two letters are to be capitalised is when it's the name of something like a martial arts school or a film but when using the word to describe that martial art itself only the first letter is capitalised "Kung fu". I really had no idea that this was the case but it's nice to learn something new. I will double check the article so that the appropriate capitalisation matches the way it's suppose to be used. Thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 14:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's very interesting. I agree, that's what I love about WP; all the cool stuff you get to learn. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Feedback
Hi, Christine I am sorry if you are confused by my copy of your review I only copied it because my previous nomanation of others articles the reviewer did not like me tick what was done on their review if you are ok for me to put done next to it on yours and when you check you can cross it out then I will use your list. I would love you help with a copy edit and the yellow highlight was so I could see more clearley what was left to do.

Thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)