Talk:Un célebre especialista sacando muelas en el gran Hotel Europa/GA1

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

Reviewer: Squeamish Ossifrage (talk · contribs) 17:51, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Always happy to see silent-era film topics getting further development. I'll have a full review assembled shortly. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Prose

 * Obviously, short articles are tough to write summaries for, but the lead is a little threadbare even for an article of this length. A sentence providing a summary of the modern opinions might help. But also, see §Other, below.
 * At some point, an English translation of the title would be helpful for many readers.
 * Included translation in this edit Kingsif (talk) 01:55, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sold on the section ordering, with the modern views coming before any contemporary information about the film's production or release.
 * Moved crit section below here Kingsif (talk) 01:55, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there any information about where that newspaper clipping is from? I'm also not sure that you need to provide the entire text of the article, plus translation, via blockquote, when it's available in an image. Also, I'm confused about why you provide English translations for some of the titles, but not for others.
 * This youtube video from a Venezuelan film promoter says that the words are lost but the films remain as cultural identity after showing the clipping, suggesting that they don't know?
 * From similar images of clippings in the Sueiro Villanueva book, it seems to be El Mundo, a national paper in Venezuela at the time. Kingsif (talk) 03:45, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I figured that the clipping wasn't clear enough that it needed transcription (and then translation.) No?
 * I translated the titles that were displayed in Spanish for the Venezuelan clipping, but which are not originally Spanish titles. The Spanish titles aren't translated because of this status. The translated titles could be rendered in French for the English translation if preferable? Kingsif (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Other

 * I'm pretty dubious of the claim that this was the first South American film, and I don't see much in the article to back that up. In fact, I've found a source that confirms this as the first Venezuelan film, but offers earlier dates for other South American productions (with 1896 dates for both Argentina and Uruguay).

The prose handling of the newspaper announcement is a bit awkward, but my biggest concern is the reliability of the Arturo Serrano source, which you lean on fairly heavily. It's possible that it (and Mickleburgh) are published works, and I'd like to offer you the chance to respond with more information about these sources. Otherwise, this presents a criterion 2b concern and is probably going to prevent me from promoting the article. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I've moved the critical section to the bottom, reordered some of the images, removed the dodgy references in favour of solid ones, stuck the transcription of the clipping into a note and translated all to English, added some extra content and expanded the lead. Anything else to be improved? Kingsif (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

I think this article is in a lot better place than it was recently. Sourcing looks pretty good. I tidied up the structure of a couple of the citations to lend a hand. I do have a few followup issues: If you decide to continue article improvement with an eventual eye on FAC, there are quite a few things that will need to be adjusted. Dates in the references will need consistent formatting, for example, and the way that you cite page numbers in longer works will need to be standardized. Ideally, hyphenated ISBN-13s. But none of that is actionable at the GA level. Once you're able to respond to these last elements, one way or another, I think we'll be in a pretty good place for promotion. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The content of the film is described only in the lead and is unreferenced. Ideally, this will appear (with citation) somewhere in the body, probably in §Screening. It is helpful to remember that the lead should be a summary of the article, and so it cannot present information not present elsewhere.
 * Added content section under Screening Kingsif (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Any chance the surgeon/dentist is identified in reliable sources, especially if he's going to be deemed "renowned" in the project's voice?
 * Searching Doesn't seem to be, but alanguage altered. Kingsif (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Any information about the survival or preservation status of the film?
 * Yup, added in content section Kingsif (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The Oxford History of World Cinema needs an ISBN.
 * Done Kingsif (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * completed the new checklist ;) I'd also like to know the dentist but can't find it! Expanded a bit more as well. Kingsif (talk) 01:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I cleaned up one of the new citations. With news articles especially, there's no need to credit anonymous corporate "authors" in most cases (stuff like "staff writer" or "for El Nacional Web". Otherwise, this is a much stronger article than it was at the start of the review process, and I'm happy to promote it accordingly. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:02, 7 March 2019 (UTC)