Talk:The Wolverine (film)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Darkwarriorblake (talk · contribs) 23:01, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

There is a random mention of Marco Beltrami winning an award on an unrelated film in the Music section. This needs to be removed.
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

This "n July 2011, Jackman said he planned to begin filming in October 2011 and that he'll fight the Silver Samurai" contains the contraction "he'll". That needs to be written as "he would". Same for any other contractions, they shouldn't be used.

The Infobox is for the original release, the extended cut running time doesn;t belong here and needs to be removed.

Minor issues, use of decades in the lead should not have an apostrophe, "1990s" not "1990's".
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

Overlink to obvious terms, Screenplay for example, and Logan is linked twice in the first paragraph, as Wolverine and as Logan. Remove Logan lin.

The final sentence of the lead needs rewriting, it assumes it was a success by multiplying the gross against the budget, but the budget is estimated and does not include things like marketing/distribution/actor deals. Say it made money, but don't say it made money by multiplying its budget.

Plot ends with a line saying the film foreshadows another film, but I have seen The Wolverine and it does not say anything related to Days of Future Past, it's a stinger without any specific commentary, the line about Days of Future past needs to be removed.

Silver Samurai is linked three times, twice in the plot, once as Harada and then as Silver Samurai, and as Silver Samurai in the pre-production section, shouldn't be double linked. Same for Magneto and Professor X, who are linked in the plot and the cast. One or the other. Shingen, Yukio, Mariko and Viper are linked twice as well, in the plot and tehn in the pre-production section.

Darren Aronofsky is linked twice, once in Development, once in Pre-production. And after he is first mentioned he should just be referred to as Aronofsky.

Principal Photography linked twice, once in pre-production, once in filming

Jean Grey linked twice, once in plot, once in Filming.

Atomic bombing of Nagasaki linked twice, once in plot, once in post-production

Hugh Jackman is linked in cast and Sequel, and again, should only be referred to as Jackman after his first introduction in the main body, same for any other actor/crew I missed.

James Mangold linked twice, in pre-production and sequel, and again, should be referred to as Mangold after introduction.


 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 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:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thank you, DWB. I'm putting this nomination on hold until after the new year when I'll have more time to address the above concerns.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 07:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine, enjoy yourself 3T. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 10:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems that took care of most of these. Are there any additional concerns?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Still:
 * The final sentence of the lead needs rewriting, it assumes it was a success by multiplying the gross against the budget, but the budget is estimated and does not include things like marketing/distribution/actor deals. Say it made money, but don't say it made money by multiplying its budget.
 * The Infobox is for the original release, the extended cut running time doesn;t belong here and needs to be removed.
 * ✅. Anything else?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you DWB for the time you put in to review this nomination.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thank you, DWB. I'm putting this nomination on hold until after the new year when I'll have more time to address the above concerns.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 07:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine, enjoy yourself 3T. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 10:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems that took care of most of these. Are there any additional concerns?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Still:
 * The final sentence of the lead needs rewriting, it assumes it was a success by multiplying the gross against the budget, but the budget is estimated and does not include things like marketing/distribution/actor deals. Say it made money, but don't say it made money by multiplying its budget.
 * The Infobox is for the original release, the extended cut running time doesn;t belong here and needs to be removed.
 * ✅. Anything else?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you DWB for the time you put in to review this nomination.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Comments by 991joseph
I moved these down here for easier reading as they will break the GA review otherwise. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 19:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The Infobox is for the original release, the extended cut running time doesn;t belong here and needs to be removed.
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The final sentence of the lead needs rewriting, it assumes it was a success by multiplying the gross against the budget, but the budget is estimated and does not include things like marketing/distribution/actor deals. Say it made money, but don't say it made money by multiplying its budget.
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The final sentence of the lead needs rewriting, it assumes it was a success by multiplying the gross against the budget, but the budget is estimated and does not include things like marketing/distribution/actor deals. Say it made money, but don't say it made money by multiplying its budget.
 * The final sentence of the lead needs rewriting, it assumes it was a success by multiplying the gross against the budget, but the budget is estimated and does not include things like marketing/distribution/actor deals. Say it made money, but don't say it made money by multiplying its budget.

-**- -**- -- Jos   eph   02:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Wrong statement. I too watched the film. Don't you remember Professor Charles Xavier (who's seen dead in X-Men: The Last Stand) and Magneto appearing in the post credit scene, meeting Wolverine?-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I know the scene exists but they don't mention anything about what the threat is, there is no mention of Days of Future Past, I'm not 100% but I dont think that film was announced by the time Wolverine was filmed and in theaters. So it's improper to say that it foreshadows Days of Future Past, mention the link between the end scene and Days of Future Past in the sequel maybe, if they are linked in that way. Again I am not sure but my understanding is that Days of Future Past is based around the young X-Men from First Class, not the older ones, so that end scene might be linking into another Wolverine film. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 19:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * True, the source material (the plot) does not explain the scenes significance so the information will need third-party verification which should be easy enough to find. Perhaps a note can be added.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added some references to prove my statement is true. You can go through it and check it out. Moreover, I am giving significant dialogues between Wolverine, Professor X and Magneto here:
 * Magneto: I'll wait.
 * Wolverine: What do you want?
 * Magneto: There are dark forces, Wolverine. Human forces building a weapon...that could bring about the end of our kind. What do I want? I want your help [This dialogue directly mentions what the threat is... and leads to Days of Future Past].
 * Wolverine: Why would I trust you?
 * Magneto: You wouldn't.
 * Professor X: Hello, Logan.
 * Wolverine: How is this possible?
 * Professor X: As I told you a long time ago...you are not the only one with gifts.
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have also made some additional touch ups on your edit. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 19:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have also made some additional touch ups on your edit. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 19:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Fixed.-- Jos   eph   13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have also made some additional touch ups on your edit. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 19:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have also made some additional touch ups on your edit. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 19:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)