User:MichelleCHsfsu/Seoul Station (film)/Remchar88 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

I'm reviewing the work of MichelleCHsfsu.


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * The draft I am reviewing can be found here.


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * The current version of the article can be found here.

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead

The lead has been minorly updated to reflect new content, notably around the shift in plot synopsis. At this stage, it is mostly clear and concise. There are some grammar issues, as are present throughout the rest of the article (I'll detail that under "organization"). However, it does not reflect all sections of the article. Two pieces of information, its film festival debut and its status as a prequel, are not detailed anywhere else in the article, and it does not make any reference to the reception section. These things should be rectified (and I'll expand on this in "content" and "organization" as well).

Content

While the content is mostly relevant, it doesn't feel up to date. All sources seem to be from 2017 or earlier. There are more recent ones available, including peer-reviewed! Information about the film festival it was released at should be included (probably under reception), as well as an explanation about its connection to Train to Busan, since these are only obliquely mentioned in the lead. There have been multiple scholarly articles discussing themes (including disenfranchisement and sexual exploitation) and the relationship of the film to the social situation in Korea, which would be very useful information to include in the Wikipedia page. In terms of content that does not belong, while all of the information is technically about the film, most of the addition to the plot synopsis is unwieldy and unnecessary. We don't need a perfect play-by-play of the film; the additions about Ki-woong are useful, since he appears to be a third lead not mentioned in the current article, but the descriptions, for example, of fight sequences are far more detailed than strictly necessary, and make it difficult to read.

Tone and Balance

The article appears neutral on the whole, the only exception being how Ki-woong is described ("useless" and "good-for-nothing"). I'm not certain if this is how he is described in the film or if this is a judgement call, but it is a little jarring. Overall, the article doesn't seem like it's trying to sway the reader, although care should be taken with the reception section, because of the nature of film reviews. More room should be given to academic sources, as film review and news sources have a different agenda.

Sources and References

Pretty much everything is backed up by a citation, although not all of them are reliable (I know the Rotten Tomatoes source is in the original article, but it should be removed), and they favor film critics pretty heavily, although they aren't all white Americans, which is a plus. I already commented on the date of the sources; just using a quick search at the SFSU library, there are at least three recent (last five years) peer-reviewed articles discussing the film. These should be incorporated over the assorted news coverage that currently make up the article, especially as they detail the film's impact/relationship with the social situation in Korea. They're more credible, and they'll help to flesh out the article more thoroughly. The links that are present appear to work.

Organization

As mentioned, there are consistent grammar errors that make the article difficult to read, mostly where the plot has been added to. These issues vary from misplaced commas to incorrect/incompatible verb tenses to confusing sentence structure. All additions should be very carefully reviewed for grammar problems, which will help with clarity, and as indicated I would recommend removing much of the addition to the plot, which will help with conciseness. In terms of sections, the ones that currently exist are useful and well-organized. I would recommend changing "Reception" to "Release and Reception," to discuss more broadly the film festival, its status as a prequel, etc. Using the peer-reviewed sources, I'd also recommend adding a section for themes, and possibly a subsection somewhere to discuss its cultural/societal impact.