Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Batman Forever/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 16:28, 18 November 2007.

Batman Forever
I'm nominating this article because there's no new information found on the net. Wildroot 16:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Object Support: Some of the sentences need to be reworked, for various reasons. Here's what I found: Problems have been fixed.


 * Edward Nygma (Jim Carrey), a lowly worker at Wayne Enterprises has been doing unauthorized research at work into a brain-manipulating device, ostensibly as an entertainment medium, following his perceived rejection as a business partner by Bruce Wayne, whom he idolizes to the point of obsession. -- This is a run-on sentence, and if I hadn't seen the movie, I wouldn't quite understand it. Nygma does research on a device to act as a form of entertainment after being rejected? That needs to get fixed.


 * Burton himself felt he had enough with two films, and the fact that he wasn't excited for the new direction Warner Brothers was going with. -- The fact...what? Everything after the comma is a dependent clause. You need another independent clause there.


 * ✅ I fixed it Wildroot 20:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The filmmakers claimed that Schumacher wanted to bring somewhere along the lines of a more "MTV organic, and edgier feel" to the film. -- The problem here is the use of the quote. Who said it? Where's the citation for it? Because you're using a direct quote, you need a citation for it.


 * ✅ That's fixed as well. It was already cited for "The Many Faces of Gotham City" featurette. Wildroot 20:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ventilation was placed in the suit and according to the costume design team, Kilmer had "a more stature feel than Michael Keaton" which served as a minor problem. -- This sentence has a citation for the quote, but I feel it would be better to give a name of the person on the costume design team, instead of just attributing it to the entire team. The entire team, I'm sure, didn't say that; only one person did. The article should state who. This same reasoning applies for the sentence above.


 * ✅ Wildroot 20:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Schumacher commented on working with Val Kilmer, Tommy Lee Jones, and Jim Carrey stating, "I was told that Val was difficult and wasn't [right] for me. Jim Carrey was a gentleman, and Tommy Lee was threatened by him. I'm tired of defending overpaid, over privileged actors. I pray I don't work with them again." -- is this a joke, or for real? Because I own the two-disc version of Forever, and the director had nothing but praise for the actors. This isn't a problem with the sentence per se, but if someone could clarify that for me, that'd be great.


 * ✅ That is already cited. Look at it. Wildroot 20:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Schumacher claims he met with actors Ewan McGregor, Jude Law, Alan Cumming, and Toby Stevens. -- This definitely needs a citation. Where did this idea come from?


 * ✅ That's already cited for "Legends of the Dark Knight: The Cinematic Saga of Batman - A Hero Reborn." I thought you said you owned it. Wildroot 20:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The film was a box office success and naturally beat out it's $100 million budget. -- This smells of WP:PEACOCK


 * ✅ fixed Wildroot 20:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * There is also a few spelling and grammar concerning wording mistakes. Not a lot, but I counted at least two, maybe three. As the article is right now, I must object to it. Anakinjmt 02:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I do own it. However, I must look at it from someone that does not own the DVD, but browses the article for the first time. I still don't see a citation for the director's comment about meeting Jude Law and Ewan McGregor. There is a citation for the casting of Chris O'Donnell which comes after the sentence. Is the citation supposed to be for both? If it is, I would think the citation should be listed twice, because as it is right now, it appears as though only the latter sentence is cited. Anakinjmt 03:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ Fine, just because I love you, I'll fix it. Geese. Personally I think it looks a little funny and weird. Anyway I'll get to that other stuff later. Anything else you want to add your royal asshole-ness? Wildroot 20:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Dude, calm down. You don't have to; I just want to know if the citation is for both. If it is, I've never seen it done that way before. Now that I know all the facts, I can change my opinion to support. Anakinjmt 04:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose due to insufficient authoritative sources to improve the article. Google Books and Google Scholar shows ample resources, not to mention a very lengthy list of resources found here at User:Erik/Batman Forever.  Feel free to copy and paste to research them for the improvement of the article.  Other issues with this article at the present:
 * The lead section fails to provide a concise overview of the entire article.
 * The non-free image in the Plot section is decorative; it needs to be signified per #8 of WP:NFC.
 * Same goes for the non-free image in the Cast section. You should be able to provide real-world context about how the characters appeared for the camera.
 * The teaser poster is another non-free image that needs to be signified -- lots of films have a wide range of posters, but we don'[t put them all in a gallery to display to readers. We need substance to signify non-free images.
 * Batman-on-Film should not be relied upon for Critical reaction of the film. There are far more authoritative sources that can be implemented, starting with Rotten Tomatoes' Cream of the Crop for Batman Forever, which has major news outlets.


 * These are primary concerns, and while there may be more, the above important points need to be addressed before further scrutiny is warranted. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.