Wikipedia:Peer review/X-Men Origins: Wolverine/archive1

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
This peer review discussion has been closed.
 * 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 December 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 December 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because per WP:GT requirements, this has to be peer reviewed per bla bla bla. Read it here at criterion 3.c. This coincides with the X-Men films Good topic candidacy. Wildroot (talk) 05:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. I came from the FT discussion. Per Cite web and cite news, references should use the same date format as the main text of the article. They have proper fields so it can be done right. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Some suggestions... I am not sure what else there is to cover. There will definitely be more content as the film's release gets closer. — Erik (talk • contrib) 16:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Trim "Starring" in the infobox to the first three names. I don't think we know at this point the extent of the other actors' involvement in the film.
 * In the "Cast" section, may I suggest removing the bold formatting? I know that the formatting has been commonplace in many film articles, a review of MOS:BOLD seems to suggest that bolding anything like the names of the actors and roles is not part of its limited scope. (Nevermind for now... trying to verify whether or not bold formatting is okay in cast lists.)
 * The trailer information in "Marketing" seems ancillary per MOS:FILM. I suggest removing it and retitling the section "Video game" for the time being.
 * Make sure that there are non-breaking spaces for the dates in the article. For example, insert one in "May 1".
 * I agree with Matthewedwards about consistency in the citations. May I also suggest writing out the full dates since without the auto-formatting that existed before, we only see ISO formatting?  Clean up like this, for example.