Wikipedia:Peer review/The Princess and the Frog/archive1

The Princess and the Frog
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I believe the article is worthy of Good Article status but would like input from others in regards to what else may need to be done to improve the article before putting it up as a Good Article candidate-- Groovy Sandwich  21:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article. I would like to see this movie, but have not yet. 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; 03:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Disambiguation links that need to be fixed can be found here
 * At least four dead external links here will need to be fixed before GAN.
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many animation FAs at Category:FA-Class Animation articles though only a few are on films.
 * 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 I do not see several of the sections mentioned in the lead - Home media, for example.
 * I also think the lead should focus on this film - what does the Great Mouse Detective have to do with this work, and why should it be mentioned in the lead?
 * I would also look at WikiProject Animation/Guidelines which says plot summaries should be concise - this seems too long. Manual of Style (writing about fiction) and How to write a plot summary might also be helpful. I note that Plot-only description of fictional works also says not to include every single plot twist in the summary.
 * Cast and characters section has a lot of information that belongs in Production - again model articles are useful, but listing the animotors for a given character seems to me like it does not belong in this section.
 * Avoid needless repetition - the Plot section already says Tia(na) dreams of opening her own restaurant, so the Cast section doesn't really need to repeat it.
 * Avoid contractions (except for direct quotations). Fix things like John Lasseter personally asked Ron Clements and John Musker, who'd left the company in 2005, to return to Disney to direct and write the film, and had let them choose the style of animation (traditional or CGI) they wanted to use.[12]
 * WP:MOS says to use full name on first use and last name only after that (for people, characters are OK with first name only if that is how they are known)(and if more than one person has the same last name, the full name may be used). Anyway, in the preceding quoted sentence it should be Clements and Musker.
 * Avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs as they interrupt the narrative flow of the article. Wherever possible, combine these with others, or perhaps expand them.
 * Any free images possible - perhaps of the directors or some of the actors?
 * 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.)