Talk:Jacob's Ladder (1990 film)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 01:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey Niemti, assuming you don't mind getting another review from me so soon, I'll be glad to take this one. (If you'd prefer a fresher set of eyes, I won't be the least offended to hand this off to another reviewer.) As last time, I'll start with an initial readthrough, noting anything I can't easily fix myself here, followed by a checklist. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Initial readthrough

On first pass, this looks very solid--really good work on this. Interesting, informative, yet not over-detailed.

*The lead's a bit short. Definitely add a sentence or two that touches on the "production" section; you might mention the film's spirtual inspiration, the famous fast-motion horror effect, the Francis Bacon inspiration, the twenty cut minutes, etc. (I've seen this movie, btw, and I can't believe they cut twenty additional minutes of scariness out of it--that really does sound overwhelming.) I'd also expand slightly to mention that the reviews were polarized, and name a few more of the influences and recognitions that followed. Since the usual rule of thumb is that the lead should touch on all sections, you might quickly note the DVD/Blu-Ray releases as well. *I added the release date from the infobox to the reception section as well, because the mention of the opening weekend made me curious when it was. I think you've done more of these movie articles than I have--does that seem like a reasonable addition to you?

• " which is possibly the earliest use of a quote from the film" -- this seems like a small bit of original research--can a source be found for this?

*Does Johnny Got His Gun (film) belong in the see also? I can see how these others can be seen as influenced by JL, but this one came out prior, and has a somewhat different plot. This isn't a GA action point, just a suggestion.

• I'm not sure that the Francis Bacon image can be used in this article; it's got a fair use rationale for the painter article, but I believe a second one has to be written to allow its use here. Which is a shame, because it's a brilliantly useful image to have; the influence is obvious at a glance. Let me ask an editor who knows a lot about copyright if this is okay.

In Johnny Got His Gun, Joe lives on-and-off in an imagined life after he returned from the war with his arms, legs, and face, and back to a "nightmare" that is actually a reality.[1] In this sense, it's a similar theme to Jacob's on-and-off imagined life after the war as he's dying in Vietnam. There's no real source for this, but it's from 1991 so it's "possibly the earliest" (when I started editing the article, it was phrased as "the first known"). I'm not really sure how to write a (more) extended lead here. --Niemti (talk) 03:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I think you were moving this in the right direction in changing that language, but I'd say the "which is possibly the earliest" clause should just be cut. Since this is first in the list and has the earliest date, the reader will infer that it's possibly the earliest; adding it without a source ourselves, though, introduces a small but unneeded bit of speculation into the article. I think that's the only remaining point of concern--thanks for addressing all these so quickly! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is clear, and spotchecks show no evidence of copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Image without fair-use rationale has been removed, other image has one.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass--another quality article.