Wikipedia:Peer review/Wonder Boys (film)/archive1

Wonder Boys (film)

 * 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 February 2009.
 * 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 February 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because a lot of work has gone into improving this page. Any suggestions and/or contributions would be more than welcome in an attempt to make it eligible for promotion to GA status.

Thanks, J.D. (talk) 16:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I saw and enjoyed this movie. This seems fairly close to GA, 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; 05:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the lead needs to do a better job summarizing the article. Some of it is too detailed for the lead (I would just say it was filmed in and around Pittsburgh, perhaps include the main university used as a location). Some sections such as the soundtrack are not mentioned in the lead at all. Saying After Wonder Boys failed at the box office, ... seems a bit POV - perhaps something more specific on how much it made and cost would be clearer / less POV.
 * Per WP:OVERLINK I would link the same item no more than once each in the lead, infobox and article (first occurence). For example, Pittsburgh is linked twice in just the lead.
 * Is the cast and characters section really needed? Almost all of the information is already in the plot section. By the way I think plot sections are supposed to be no more than 900 or so words long - this seems a bit too long.
 * The box office section is only two sentences and should be either combined with another section or expanded if possible (probably the Re-relelase section).
 * Prose is generally good but there are some rough spots that could stand a copyedit or just printing it out and reading it out loud.