Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Peer review/Leaving Las Vegas

Leaving Las Vegas
I have followed the style guidelines for this article, and hope to make Leaving Las Vegas a Good Article. I need to make sure that I am on the right track. Thank you, Crzycheetah 03:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Why did they choose that particular film gauge? Kaisershatner 15:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, compare with other FA films at WP:FA.
 * Category:FA-Class film articles would be better. :) Cbrown1023 22:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Cbrown1023

 * Won't pass without a fair user rationale for Image:Leaving Las Vegas DVD cover.jpg. Cbrown1023 03:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Make sure the prose flows well (I noticed a slight stick, but that just may be my reading style versus your writing style...). Cbrown1023 03:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've made some changes to the article; things I didn't state here. Cbrown1023 03:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--Crzycheetah 08:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The article is very short, you could go into more detail on most of the items. Also, remember that the style guidelines are just a basis, it is great if you do more than the guidelines state. Cbrown1023 03:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Supernumerary

 * Cite web format for sources.
 * When was it shot?
 * If the character was described in the plot, a description in the cast section is redundant.
 * There is more information in the cast section than in the plot. Also, I think that the cast section would look dull without descriptions.--Crzycheetah 08:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Some of the cast info could be moved to production (like how they researched the parts). Usually the cast section is pretty plain, but I don't think it's a hard and fast rule.--Supernumerary 08:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Formatting issues need to be fixed in the infobox.
 * Did Cbrown1023 fix them already? If not, could you point them, please?--Crzycheetah 08:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Went ahead and made the minor change.--Supernumerary 08:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Avoid weasel words (like arguably).
 * Could do with some copyediting.--Supernumerary 03:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)