Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Fifth Element/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 archived by Graham Colm (talk) 06:26, 5 September 2014 (diff).

The Fifth Element

 * Nominator(s): Freikorp (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

This article is about the 1997 award winning science fiction blockbuster film. I overhauled this article in 2013, initiating a successful nomination for good article status. Having significantly expanded the article again since then, I now believe it meets featured article requirements. This is my first FAC nomination, so I apologise if I have overlooked any issue. Freikorp (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Eric   Corbett  20:50, 11 July 2014 (UTC) Eric  Corbett  21:24, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you certain that Le Cinquième Élément is the correct French title? I was taught that capital letters in French don't take accents, and the title seems to be given as Le Cinquième élément elsewhere.
 * You're right! Changed.
 * The lead has "special forces Major", whereas the Plot section has "major in the special forces". Is it to be major or Major?
 * Changed to 'major'.
 * "... destroys an attacking Earth battleship". What is the battleship attacking? Is it a naval battleship?
 * Clarified that it is a spaceship, and that it was attacking the 'Great Evil'.
 * "The current Mondoshawan contact, priest Vito Cornelius, informs President Lindberg of the history of the Great Evil ...". Who is President Lindberg?
 * Clarified that it is the president of earth.
 * "The Diva is killed ...". Why the Diva? In the previous paragraph she was introduced as "Diva Plavalaguna", implying that Diva was her first name.
 * I've changed all references to the character to her last name, which already appeared once anyway, so now it is consistent.


 * Quick image check - Poster image is fine, the file File:Valerian_FifthElement2.jpg is a good use within the article but I would suggest making sure the caption makes reference back to the French work it was inspired by, reflecting some of that in the image rational (perhaps including the ref for that in the ratioanle page). --M ASEM (t) 21:46, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. :)
 * Thank you both for your comments, and thanks for your copyedits Eric. I have now addressed each issue that was brought up. Freikorp (talk) 02:09, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Support from Mirokado
I've always enjoyed watching this film, but I must confess that the plot has seemed rather to interrupt the 3D-traffic scenes! Perhaps I will pay more attention after having read this article. I have not noticed any omissions and have only a few comments:
 * I tweaked the article a bit to remove a couple of reported citation problems. While doing that I noticed that there are two citations to Valerian: The New Future Trilogy, which do not contain equivalent information: one has editors, the other has a translator and a series parameter. It is probably better to make them consistent, unless for example only parts of the book were translated.
 * Thanks, i've merged two reference to make them consistent.


 * The citations have a format delimited by full stops and ending with a full stop. The short-form references should also end with a full stop for consistency: "Hayward, p. 91." etc.
 * Done.


 * Plot: Please see WP:PLOTPRESENT: "As key characters are introduced in the plot of a film or play with a known cast, list the actors' names in parentheses after them, Character (Actor), where applicable." This is done in the lead for Willis and Jovovich, but not in the plot for the other characters. To make the plot section self-sufficient I would do it for those two as well, particularly as Jovovich' character is not named in the lead.
 * Done.

--Mirokado (talk) 19:18, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I was a bit surprised that Besson's book The Story of the Fifth Element: The Adventure and Discovery of a Film is only "further reading". Is it too much a primary source to be acceptable as a reference? Does it have nothing to add to coverage of the subject?
 * The book was listed in the bibliography when I found the article, though it was not used anywhere as an inline citation, so I moved it to 'Further reading'. I considered buying the book to use it as a reference, as i'm sure it could add to the subject, however, it is a collector's item and out of print. The cheapest I could find a second hand copy on amazon.com was $300, a tad more than what i'm willing to spend on my hobby of editing wikipedia. Would it be more appropriate to move it back to the bibliography, even though it is not used as an inline citation? Should we delete it due to it looking out of place? Or do you think given the circumstances it can work where it is? Thanks for your comments Mirakado. Freikorp (talk) 03:02, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Har, I didn't check availability before commenting! It's better to leave it as it is so the referencing in the article is clear. --Mirokado (talk) 04:04, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response. Just checking the references again I noticed a few other minor issues, then I can support this article. --Mirokado (talk) 04:04, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

--Mirokado (talk) 04:04, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Current refs 10, 18, 60, 68, 73, 97: citations add outer double quotes, so inner quotes in the title need to be single
 * Current ref 27: We normally transform titles to title case rather than retaining all-caps words
 * Current refs 62, 69, 71, 81: (magazine) seems redundant here, three times a wl disambiguator so a pipe would be necessary, once not linked, in that case "Discover Magazine" is how they refer to themselves if clarification is needed.
 * Done, done and done :). Thanks again for your observations. Freikorp (talk) 06:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. Supporting now. --Mirokado (talk) 12:52, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Additional comments from Eric   Corbett  Eric  Corbett  12:43, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "... the film's central plot involves the survival of planet Earth, which becomes the duty of Korben Dallas". The survival of Earth can't really be a duty. Responsibility?
 * Changed to responsibility.
 * "Learning of her significance, Dallas must join forces with her to recover four mystical stones essential to defending Earth from an impending attack." I'd drop "learning of her significance", as it just seems to dangle there. Why must Dallas join forces with her?
 * I suppose he doesn't have to save the planet, he just chooses to. Both 'learning of her significance' and 'must' have been removed.
 * If the Mondoshawans collected the five elements from Earth in 1914, promising to return them in time to defeat the Great Evil, and didn't return until 2263, then how did the stones end up in the possession of Diva Plavalaguna?
 * Clarified.
 * "... representing the four classical elements, and a sarcophagus containing a Fifth Element ... which combines the power of the other four elements into a Divine Light capable of defeating the evil. The Mondoshawans promise their contact, a priest, that they will return with the Elements in time to stop the Great Evil". The capitalisation seems inconsistent there. Why is Fifth Element capitalised but four elements isn't? And why is Elements capitalised in the final sentence? Added to which we have "the leitmotif that first appears when professor Pacoli mentions the fifth element" in the Soundtrack section. Don't the stones represent the elements anyway, rather than being the elements? So how could the Mondoshawans return the elements?
 * Well spotted. Changed to lower case for consistency, and clarified that they are returning the element stones.
 * "... a humanoid woman known as "Leeloo" (Milla Jovovich), who has been described as 'perfect. Described by whom as perfect?
 * Good point. By several people at various times, but easier to just remove it than specify one of them I think.
 * "Cornelius instructs David to prepare the temple and stows away on the same space plane as Dallas". What temple? Why is Dallas on a space plane when we've just been told that he was going on a cruise?
 * Clarified it is the temple from the beginning of the film, and that the space flight is going to the cruise ship.
 * "The film has been cited as a classical narrative ...". A film isn't a narrative.
 * Changed to 'story'.
 * "The classical narrative, however, is under threat ...". How can a narrative be under threat?
 * Not sure how that ended up there, changed to what I think I meant to say in the first place.
 * "Despite the flaws cited in the world of The Fifth Element ...". The flaws aren't being cited. Perhaps something like "Despite the evident flaws in the world of The Fifth Element ..."?
 * Changed.
 * "The film is said to problematise the relationship between technology and man." Is problematise a real word? What does it mean?
 * Probematize at Oxford dictionaries: . See also Problematization. I can choose a synonym if you like, I don't feel one way or another about the word.


 * Thanks for your comments again. I hope i've now addressed each issue. Freikorp (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Oppose, reluctantly, as I think the content is fine. But there are just too many problems with the prose for me to support this article, and I don't have the time to address them all. Eric  Corbett  20:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Completely understand the lack of time, but if I don't know what's wrong with the prose I can't very well fix it; I addressed everything you brought up. I guess i'll wait for someone else to comment on it. Thanks anyway, and thanks for the copyedits you did. Freikorp (talk) 12:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree; complaints have to be actionable to be taken into account. Tezero (talk) 02:11, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Dank
Graham Colm (talk) 06:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I did more editing on this one than usual. I'm trying not to reflect personal preferences, but to follow something like consensus. You're welcome to revert, and if you can reword in your own style, that's even better.
 * "the most financially successful French film until the release of The Intouchables in 2011."; "It went on to become the most profitable French film made to that point,[1] a record it held for 16 years until the release of The Intouchables in 2011. As of 2011 it was still considered to be France's most successful exported film.": I believe Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis was more financially successful by some measures, so some of this wording may need tweaking.
 * Is it acceptable to add financial information on this film even if this information contradicts the references I have, and even if I cannot find a reference that links these two films?
 * If one source says that Lucy's lemonade costs $1 and a separate source says that Linus's lemonade costs $2, it's not original research for you to say that Linus's costs more than Lucy's, as long as you cite both sources. - Dank (push to talk)
 * "The film is also said to explore", etc.: I'm not taking a position on the important question of how specific you should be in the text in describing who's saying what, at least in broad strokes.
 * I've attribute all the opinions from the book The Films of Luc Besson to said book. Hopefully this addresses a large part of this concern.
 * "which were then read as three-dimensional from the viewpoint of the camera": ?
 * Upon reading over that, and its original source, i'm not entirely sure what it means either. Removed.
 * "$17 million", "US$263 million": MOS, and WP:$ in MOSNUM, say that you can go with or without "US" at the first occurrence (for this article, I think), but just use "$" after that.
 * Done.
 * "Exotic styles are combined with more conventional scoring techniques in the leitmotif that first appears when professor Pacoli mentions the fifth element, the militaristic snares as the warship prepares to attack the dark planet, and the Mahlerian funereal piece heard when Leeloo learns about war.": Some of that is mine. I wasn't sure of your meaning; you may want to delete the "exotic styles" part.
 * Offline source reads: "The score ... relies even more heavily on orchestral textures and exotic influences, but blends Serra's characteristic riff and song-form cues with more conventional scoring techniques. ... as the Professor mentions the Fifth Element we have a hint of the first appearance of a leitmotiv in Serra's work, another technique borrowed from conventional film-scoring. ... Other conventional gestures include the militaristic rattle of snares that develop into a march as the warship prepares to destroy the dark planet and is consumed by it, and the tension-inducing invert pedal stinger as Leeloo growls at Monroe through the glass of her regeneration tube. We hear Mahlerian, funeral timpani as Leeloo learns about war." Hopefully that will make my intended meaning clear; any suggestions for rewording?
 * Thanks, I guessed wrong yesterday. I've just fixed it.
 * "100,000 square feet": I wasn't looking closely at measurements; this one, at least, needs a convert template.
 * Done.
 * Support on prose, with those caveats, per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. Eric's edits (above) helped me get through the tough "Themes" section. - Dank (push to talk) 21:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your copy edits Dank; I know my copy-editing skills are a weaker point in my editing. Please look at my responses to your points and let me know if you have answers to my questions or any further concerns. Freikorp (talk) 15:59, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. I made a few tweaks; everything looks good. You may want to do something with Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis, as mentioned above. - Dank (push to talk) 16:44, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Just for archival purposes i'd like to mention that I did address the suggestion regarding Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis; I tweaked it to say The Fifth Element was the "highest grossing French film at the box-office", as opposed to the most successful, as Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis had a better cost to profit ratio. Freikorp (talk) 07:30, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.