Talk:Scarface (1932 film)

Lede
The lede should be a summary of the entirety of the article. For instance, it should contain a basic summary of the plot. I'd recommend something more in the vicinity of three sentences than one. Missed the FA nom, but happy to read through if you're looking for reviewers in the future. (not watching, please )  czar  01:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Can't agree there, I'm afraid. IMO a single-sentence summary of the premise of the film is all that's required. Popcornduff (talk) 02:04, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Required, maybe, but it doesn't give the reader much to work with. Per WP:FILMLEDE, I'd at least expect some context on the co-stars' role in the premise, and context on why the depiction of the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre is important. There's plenty else to paraphrase in the lede for an article of this size, though. czar  02:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * , I tried expanding the lead as you suggested. I would certainly love a review if you are interested. I still want to promote this to FA. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * , Thinking out loud about what a general audience needs to know in the first paragraph—is it important to list all six headlining actors in the lede? I haven't edited enough film articles to know if there's a party line, but I think it's overkill to introduce the character names and actors of roles that won't be repeated in the rest of the lede. E.g., he pursues his boss's mistress and his sister pursues his best hitman—is any more detail needed than that?
 * Also the lede goes into great detail on the censors, but makes no mention of production. The lede should be written to summarize the entirety of the article. Think of giving each sentence in the lede proportional weight to the length of the article. (Also, in general, feel free to revert any of my edits here. I'm just trying to find what is easiest for a general audience to read.) czar  02:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Review

 * I'd first challenge you to reduce the number of headings. Is it possible to group the content in fewer headings that still effectively group the article's contents? For reference, you can compare against other film articles FAs here.
 * For example, is the content of "Related films" and "Italian language versions" not primarily a component of the film's "Legacy"? As a reader, I'd want to hear about the 1932 film's influence on Pacino in context of the 1983's production
 * Next steps could also include checking the refs to make sure they're the best possible source (at least one of the links was dead when I checked). Ideally, there would be definitive, secondary sources whenever possible. On same note, it's not necessary to source the plot, since if it's just descriptive, it's assumed to be verifiable in the film. However, it's nice to provide secondary sourcing such that a reader can look up details without watching the full film, or also to include analysis that you wouldn't be able to write through simple description. Not necessary, but if available, I recommend using secondary sourcing for the synopsis. czar  03:11, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Take your pick
"Filming lasted six months, which was long for films made in the early 1930s." "Filming took three months..." "Despite that, Scarface was filmed and put together quickly." 2A02:AA1:101B:F002:89AB:6FD8:1109:1E62 (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2019 (UTC)