This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Comment: This has some serious issues going on with it. Firstly, the article is written more as a personal opinion/research paper than a Wikipedia article. Comments like "giving the film the feel of an old time Punch and Judy show" are pretty much just your personal opinion and should be avoided at all costs because it's how you personally feel the film feels like. The sources are also an issue, as one of the links goes to a non-notable blog entries (most blogs are not usable as sources unless they're by someone who is considered to be an absolute authority or very notable, which most aren't), an IMDb listing (IMDb can be used for trivial info stuff, but will never show notability and should be avoided as sources in general), a database entry (can't show notability), and a press release. The film does look like it should be notable, but this needs a pretty heavy re-write to fit notability and neutrality guidelines. You'd also have to find some other sources for the article, as none of the above really show notability. Even though the press release shows that it won an award, you have to show that the award is notable and that its showings at the film festivals were documented. I recommend getting someone from the film wikiproject to help out, with Schmidt being someone I'd particularly recommend. He's pretty much a genius at finding sources and creating articles about movies. If he can't do it, he'll find someone who can.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 14:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
I have revised this article numerous times but it may still need work. Please help improve this page. Thanks TheWriteGuy2 (talk) 17:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
Comment: This has some serious issues going on with it. Firstly, the article is written more as a personal opinion/research paper than a Wikipedia article. Comments like "giving the film the feel of an old time Punch and Judy show" are pretty much just your personal opinion and should be avoided at all costs because it's how you personally feel the film feels like. The sources are also an issue, as one of the links goes to a non-notable blog entries (most blogs are not usable as sources unless they're by someone who is considered to be an absolute authority or very notable, which most aren't), an IMDb listing (IMDb can be used for trivial info stuff, but will never show notability and should be avoided as sources in general), a database entry (can't show notability), and a press release. The film does look like it should be notable, but this needs a pretty heavy re-write to fit notability and neutrality guidelines. You'd also have to find some other sources for the article, as none of the above really show notability. Even though the press release shows that it won an award, you have to show that the award is notable and that its showings at the film festivals were documented. I recommend getting someone from the film wikiproject to help out, with Schmidt being someone I'd particularly recommend. He's pretty much a genius at finding sources and creating articles about movies. If he can't do it, he'll find someone who can.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 14:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)