Wikipedia:Peer review/Movie production incentives in the United States/archive1

Movie production incentives in the United States
This peer review discussion has been closed. This article was created as part of the WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy. I've listed this article for peer review because we'd like to receive community feedback. As new creators, we'd like feedback on content, tone, style, and any other aspects deemed noteworthy by readers.

Thanks, Dglasser13 (talk) 01:22, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this, which looks pretty good, especially for an initial effort; 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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:14, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are several GAs at Category:GA-Class United States Public Policy articles which may be good models.
 * There are two dead external links - see here. These appear to be newspapers, so the link can just be to the newspaper (does not have to be a working web link if it is in print too)
 * The lead seems like it could be expanded per WP:LEAD. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself
 * My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but History and Types do not seem to be in the lead as it currently stands.
 * I think that the History section could have a bit more about the esptablishment of the US film industry in Hollywood as background. I would then think about putting the section in more chronological order. It just seems odd to have the earliest incentives (LA in 1991) in the very last paragraph. See provide context to the reader
 * The WP:MOS says to avoid bullet point lists wherever possible (convert them to straight prose instead). This does not mean to have no such lists in the article, but the only one I would think about keeping is the one in Types (and even then I am not sure)
 * Make sure the use of bold type follows WP:ITALIC
 * Make sure that section and sub-section headers follow WP:HEAD which says not to repeat the title of the article or section headers in a section or subsection. So "Arguments supporting incentives" and "Arguments against incentives" could just be "Pro" and "Con" (the article is about incentives, and the header is already "Arguments"
 * Avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs as they break up the flow of the narrative. WHerever possible combine these paragraphs with others or perhaps expand them.
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)
 * Could some examples of films made with such incentives be added? I know that The Road (film) was filmed at least partly in Pennsylvania, as one example.