Wikipedia:Peer review/The Boys from Baghdad High/archive2

The Boys from Baghdad High
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I'd like to take this to GA and possibly FA eventually, but I am worried that the Synopsis, production and reception sections are way too big. I need help in chopping them down to a more managable and acceptable size, but where they are still understandable and relevant.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, Matthewedwards : Chat  18:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: This is even better than the last time I read it, but seems to still have some of the same issues from my previous PR. I was hoping someone else might review for a fresh perspective, but here are some suggestions for improvement.
 * Since "Baghdad High" is an alternate English name and the one used in the only image shown, I would list it in the lead too (probably in the first sentence).
 * Done Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I said this before, but I think there is too much detail in the second paragraph of the lead on the production staff (consulting editors?!?) and not enough on the boys themselves - just their names are given, but I think their religious backgrounds could also be in the lead, as well as something on how they only filmed at home and in school for safety. It might alos be worth mentioning in the lead the way they did not meet the boys until after filming was done, or had to get the videos delivered through third parties.
 * Done Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The visual cards and Glowfrog Studios is only in the lead and also seems like it could just be in the text (if it is kep in the lead, it should be in the text as the lead is a summary of the rest of the article.
 * I've removed this because it's not necessary in the understanding of the overall article


 * Text could be tightened up in places - for example in the lead could it just be "Directed and produced by Ivan O'Mahone and Laura Winter of Renegade Pictures and StoryLabTV...? instead of adding they also directed it later?
 * Done Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I said this before too, but direct quotes in the lead need to be cited, so all the direct quotes from reviews need refs there - see MOS:QUOTE and WP:LEAD
 * I couldn't find anything at either pages which says this, WP:LEADCITE says "challenged or likely to be challenged, and quotations, should be cited. Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material.". Since the Lead quotes are repeated again, are the cites absolutely necessary? I think cites look ugly in the Lead, so if that's the case I'll probably rework the paragraph and remove them. Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Also see MOS:QUOTE on using logical quotations - unless you are quoting a complete sentence, the punctuation at the end should be outside the quotations.
 * I'll have to look closely for these. Are there any specific quotes where this is occurring? Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think the Synopsis could be broken into two or more parts - one could be a much shorter Synopsis which just describes the basics of the plot. If you had to tell the story of the film in a few paragraphs, what would it be? The rest could either be in a new section or two (not sure what to call it) or could perhaps be part of of other sections. For example the first two paragraphs are more sort of a background (about the school and neighborhood) and could be a Background section. The direct quotes need a ref and most of the things where the article discusses the film could be in a different section - for example the paragraph starting The documentary highlights the similarities and differences between Western and Iraqi children. is interesting but too detailed for plot synopsis. It should be in the article somewhere, as well as the next paragraph starting with The documentary also shows what the boys' families feel about living in Iraq. I am not sure if this would fit in the Production section (the gas siphoning incident and Saddam Hussein's execution are already discussed there). Perhaps if there are quotes from the producers / directors saying things like "we wanted show the similarities and differences...." then details from the film could be included there? Or perhaps some of the incidents could be used in the critical reception section as examples?
 * I think the direct quotes in the Synopsis section also need refs (presumably to the film itself) and if they are longer than 4 lines, then the MOS says they should be presented with blockquote
 * I do not really see that the article needs to have material removed. Did someone say to do this? I think that detail is good and useful in a article and this seems like useful detail and makes for an interesting read.
 * MOS:FILM says summaries should usually be no more than 700 words, and MOS:TV says 400. Other than that, no. I'd like to get it down to around 7 or 800. Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Article needs a copyedit - for example is it "arte" or "ARTE" (both are used)? I read for comprehension (not to proofread) but I also found places with waht seemed to be missing words or slightly awkward phrases.
 * Done the Arte bit. Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it is better to go from the general to the specific - so for example in the Synopsis section, it now reads "At the end of the school year, the boys take their final exams. After failing all seven of his mock exams, Mohammed knows he needs to perform well, but worries about his lack of preparation. The boys must pass all seven exams to graduate. If they fail two or fewer subjects, they can take the exams again, but if they fail three or more subjects, they must repeat the entire final year. When the results arrive..." I think it would be much better to move the second sentence (Mohammed failing seven mock exams) after the current fourth sentence - this would explain the whole exam system, then say M failed seven practice exams, then go on to them receiving results.
 * Done Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think this owuld probably pass GA as is now (with some tweaks) and could be ready for FAC with with some reorganization and a good copyedit.
 * The lead says it is a British / Iraqi coproduction, but the infobox says it is British - considering it was filmed in Iraq, this seems odd.
 * Done Matthewedwards : Chat  16:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

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; 20:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The more I think about it, I wonder if the other new (sub)section could be called "Themes", perhaps within the critical reception section, where some of the Synopsis could be moved.