User:Broeygisvon1446/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Gangnam Blues

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Korean cinema is part of Korean Visual Culture––which is our classes topic of conversation––so I went through the C-Class articles under Korean Cinema and this one sounded interesting. I did think it was going to be more music related though, given 'blues' in the title.

My first impression of this article is that it has a lot of information and seems to be from a neutral perspective. It's generally easy to understand. There are a few things I think can be improved, though.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is mostly sufficient. However, I think it needs to include some reference to the fact that the article is called Gangnam Blues but the movie is called Gangnam 1970. It doesn't necessarily need to have the reason or explanation for it, just, 'Gangnam 1970, known in English as Gangnam Blues' or something along these lines.

The tone is neutral and the content is just a bit off balance. There is a lot of focus on the synopsis and that's not to say that it's too much, but there should be some more focus on some other sections. There is a Critical Review Section that has only one review. It would be good for there to be more reviews there because I'm sure more of them exist. There also could be some sort of list of all the places that showed this movie in theaters. The article only has South Korea and China, but it was also mentioned that there was a version released in the Philippines. There is also only one song listed under soundtrack but there was probably more than one song in the movie.

There was only one image on the article and it's one of the movie posters. I assume there aren't more because of copyright restrictions.

The article generally has good grammar and is easy to understand but there was a lot of comma splicing in some places and some sentences that could have better wording.

The talk page is very minimal. Only one person has written in it and it's about verifying external links, not much to do with the actually content. In terms of the article history, not many people have edited the article or made major edits. --Broeygisvon1446 (talk) 21:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)