 | A fact from 51 Birch Street appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 January 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
POVish edit
This is a good subject for an article; it's the sort of notable-but-obscure subject that Wikipedia is such a great resource for learning about. But I have a problem with these two sentences:
What begins as an intimate, autobiographical story, soon evolves into a broader meditation on the universal themes of love, marriage, fidelity and the mystery of family. Unlike some other recent memoir documentaries, such as Capturing the Friedmans and Tarnation, it does't reveal terrible secrets or extreme dysfunction. Instead, 51 Birch Street explores more subtle forms of repression, secrecy and denial, and confirms that marriage is also among the most complex and mysterious.
This sounds like the words of a movie critic, not an encyclopedia editor. Reading it, my eyes starting dancing around looking for evidence of a citation or quoation marks indicating where it had come from. If this is a paraphrase from a movie critique, it should be cited. If not, it should be replaced with language with a more appropriate tone. Thanks. Shaundakulbara 01:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- I tried to wikify the paragraph a bit. Cheers, Camptown 11:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)