Talk:Kidnap (2017 film)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Tayi Arajakate in topic GA Review

Writing edit

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't really do this myself, but the writing is very hard to understand (and contains numerous errors). Samer (talk) 04:06, 29 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

The Call similarities edit

Shouldn't the heavy similarities between The Call (2013 film) and this film be referenced somewhere, except for a mention in the 'See also' section? Are they connected in any way (It would surprise me if they weren't)? It seems almost comical seeing both posters side by side. -Throast (talk) 23:29, 7 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kidnap (2017 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 01:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

  • Hello Some Dude From North Carolina, I will take up the review for this nomination and present it to you in some time. Tayi Arajakate Talk 01:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
    Some Dude From North Carolina, I've completed the review. The article more or less meets the good article criteria but there are a couple minor issues which need to be resolved before I can promote it, primarily the first one listed in the comments. Good work on the article in general! Tayi Arajakate Talk 19:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
    The issues are resolved now so I'll promote the article. Tayi Arajakate Talk 07:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Reply


Comments edit

  • The last four producers and the editor mentioned in the infobox are not mentioned in those roles (or not mentioned at all) in the body nor are they cited in the infobox. Di Bonaventura Pictures is abbreviated as "di B Pictures" in the infobox, the shouldn't it be "dB Pictures"?
  Working Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  Done 1. Added Panic Room format. 2. The company is credited as "di B Pictures" in the poster. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • "... with Halle Berry attached to star ..." The use of "attached to" in the phrase sounds odd, I would suggest using "featured as" instead. I would also suggest adding a comma before the "with".
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • "... while still owing the feature itself $15 million ..." This phrase isn't very clear. I would suggest adding a "worth" after itself.
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Assessment edit

  1. Comprehension: The comprehension is good.
  2.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The prose is generally clear, concise and understandable.   Pass
    (b) (MoS) The article is compliant with the manual of style.   Pass
  3. Verifiability: The article is verifiable.
  4.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) The article has a list of references and in-line citations for its contents in the body.   Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Sources used are reliable.   Pass
    (c) (original research) No original research found.   Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) No flagrant copyright issues found.   Pass
  5. Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive.
  6.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The article broadly covers all major aspects.   Pass
    (b) (focused) The article is focused without unnecessary deviations.   Pass
  7. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
  8.   Pass
    Notes Result
    The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.   Pass
  9. Stability: The article is stable.
  10.   Pass
    Notes Result
    No ongoing content disputes or edit wars present.   Pass
  11. Illustration: The article is well illustrated.
  12.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) No copyright issues found, images are appropriately tagged.   Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Use and caption are good.   Pass