Wikipedia:Peer review/Golden Film/archive2

Golden Film

 * Previous peer review
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. Golden Film is a comprehensive article, that treats its topic without going into unnecessary details. It follows Wikipedia's guidelines on verifiability and style. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to know which improvements the article needs in order to pass as featured article. – Ilse@ 13:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Article is generally well done but the prose is a bit awkward and could use a copy edit. Here are some suggestions for improvement: Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The image comes from a website that seems to indicate it is copyrighted, but my Dutch is very poor and I am not sure what the disclaimer says. Is this a free image or not?
 * The website mentions copyright, but as you can read on the image description page, Speravi gave permission to use the image under a GNU FDL license. – Ilse@ 16:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, for FAC you will probably want to send a copy of the permission email to OTRS. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I no longer have the email and I can't find any explanation on OTRS about permission emails. – Ilse@ 10:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * QUoting from the page: "If you are an experienced Wikipedian with a question for OTRS about image licensing or permissions Please e-mail [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org]. Hope this helps, you may need to contact the copyright holder again to get the image through FAC. Ruhrfisch  &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * A few examples of awkward sentences
 * For each awarded film there is one trophy for the film crew and another for the film cast. perhaps better as something like Each film that earns the Golden Film receives one trophy for the film crew and another for the cast.?
 * their receiving films? While the cast and crew have considered their receiving films to be successful, critics have said that films that sold only 75,000 or 100,000 tickets cannot be considered a commercial success.
 * during the original cinema circulation? A Golden Film is awarded to a film from the Netherlands once it has sold 100,000 cinema tickets in the Netherlands during the original cinema circulation.[1]
 * Even this See for a chronological list: List of films that received the Golden Film.
 * For FA the article has to be written at a professional level.
 * Another FA criterion is comprehensiveness. While what is here seems fine, it just feels like there is something missing. I think it might be a case of providing context for the reader - see WP:PCR
 * How many Dutch films are released each year? What percentage of Dutch films earn the Gold Film each year?
 * How many tickets does it take for a film to be a commercial success (break even / make a profit)? I know many countries subsidize their film industries - is this the case in the Netherlands?
 * I believe this question is already answered in the section 'Response to the award'. "Johan Nijenhuis, the director of Full Moon Party, has admitted outright that he considers only 300,000 visitors a failure." and "It starts to be something for a producer when 350,000 or more cinema tickets are sold." – Ilse@ 16:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I wasn't sure if that was just for that film / that director or in general. Might want to somehow make it clearer that that is for all films. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Who gets the actual award - whose house or office is it in generally?
 * In the four years before the award, the bext percentage was 6.1%, in the years since the award started the worst percentage was 9.2% What are the explanations for this? Is it just the award or is something else going on or does no one really know?
 * Interesting issue, but I have not found any analysis, and could therefore only speculate about it. – Ilse@ 10:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Per WP:MOS block quotes should only be used for quotes that are 4 lines or longer
 * I posted a question on the talk page: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, so I will come back to this later. – Ilse@ 16:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Most refs look good but you cannot cite Wikipedia as a reliable source - ref 12.
 * The Wikipedia article used is a featured list. It is used as a reference in this article in order to say how many films have been awarded a Golden Film in each year and how many films in total were awarded, for which at least 52 references are used. You don't consider refering to the featured list is an acceptable exception in this case? – Ilse@ 16:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no way this will get through FAC with a cite to a Wikipedia article, even a FL. Is there no reliable source that is a list of all them by year - that could be cited here? I also note the External link to the official Golden Film website is now a redirect to some sort of film festival. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The Netherlands Film Festival (www.filmfestival.nl) awards the Golden Film. The externally linked website (www.goldenfilm.nl) currently redirects to the most recently awarded film on the website of the film festival. However, the list of awarded films on this page is incomplete and does not contain dates, so in order to count the number of awards per year, 52 additional references are needed. (Previously, several users insisted on splitting off List of films that received the Golden Film from this article.) – Ilse@ 10:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Please use my examples as just that - these are not an exhaustive list and if one example is given, please check to make sure there are not other occurrences of the same problem.
 * Thank you for your comments; I am looking into the issues you have raised. I have already peer reviewed an article shortly after I had listed this article for a peer review, see Peer review/Polar city/archive1. – Ilse@ 16:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your review! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)