Talk:The Extraordinary Adventures of Mr. West in the Land of the Bolsheviks/GA1
Latest comment: 4 months ago by Utopes in topic Comments
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Utopes (talk · contribs) 23:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I'll be taking a look at this article now. I'm looking forward to reviewing it! Utopes (talk / cont) 23:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Ghosts of Europa:, feel free to let me know your thoughts on this. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:43, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Utopes: Thank you for reviewing this! I've made most of the changes you suggested and responded to your notes below.Ghosts of Europa (talk) 02:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Comments
editHello! I'll be taking a look at this article now. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:40, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- "becomes the victim of an elaborate scam" - how? It might be better to be direct about the action that took place, "scam" is only used one other time in the article.
- "it's often considered the beginning of a golden age of Soviet cinema" - by whom? If in the the lede, this should probably be attributed to whichever group has defined a "golden age of Soviet cinema".
- I've attributed this to "critics and historians". That's still a bit vague, but hopefully the three citations in the body shore this up.
- "However, it was also criticized for its American focus and disinterest in politics; the film was censored two years after its release." - it's unclear out of the gate how these are related. This sentence should probably be restructured to make it clear how the criticism unfolded.
- "He rejected Konstantin Stanislavski's acting method, preferring his actors emphasize precise, legible movements over psychology and emotion." - this is an unnecessary continuation. Leaving off the direct mention of Stanislavski's method at the beginning would not change the meaning of what's being compared. It might still be good to talk about this method, but the way the sentence is currently structured is a fragmented comparison (going from Stanislavski, to Kuleshov, back to Stanislavski).
- I'm not sure I understand your feedback here, but I've split this into two sentences to hopefully sound less fragmented. Let me know if this helps.
- "The actors' performances are physical and exaggerated, especially since many characters play exaggerated caricatures within the logic of the film." - the "especially since" breakaway does not seem necessary to be included in this format. If the performances are physical and exaggerated, that's that. Adding onto this extends the necessary length of what's being said, and if a mention of "exaggerated caricatures" is wanted, that should be reincorporated into the main sentence's purpose, not as a plus-one inference at the end.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- To avoid wasting film, Kuleshov and his actors meticulously choreographed scenes" - the choreography being considered "meticulous" is not verifiable, although the use of stopwatches and metronomes is. Especially with the "to avoid wasting film" bit, it may be better to say something along lines of "stopwatches and metronomes were used...to avoid wasting film".
- a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- "Western countries largely condemned the revolution's violence; the United States would not diplomatically recognize the Soviet Union until 1933." - it doesn't seem to be incredibly necessary to go into the details of the Russian Revolution, especially after stating that the setting took place in the aftermath of the Revolution. The condemnation of the revolution violence and the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union in 1933 does not seem incredibly pertinent here.
- Hmm... I think this provides important context for why the American characters expect the country to be a barbaric wasteland, and why it's so triumphant / absurd that Wests hangs up a picture of Lenin at the end. Thoughts?
- "In one scene, Boris Barnet fell while traversing a tightrope; he claimed Kuleshov left him hanging for a half hour while criticizing his insufficient training (although Kuleshov insisted he immediately called for help). Barnet refused to film the scene again, so Vladimir Fogel performed the stunt instead." - this is a really extended, and seemingly unnecessary tangent. It might be good to include as an example of a production mishap, but the way it's currently worded with the semicolon and parenthesis excerpt is too back-and-forthy to be useful. I'd recommend shortening this, mentioning Vladimir Fogel does not seem relevant as they don't appear on the in-article cast list.
- "Kuleshov includes visual jokes, such as..." - it's unclear how necessary it is to explicitly comment on each joke, wikilinking creators of other films in the process just because of a gag that was shared between the two. This section seems like it can be trimmed and made more specific, sticking to the most important allusions.
- "Western countries largely condemned the revolution's violence; the United States would not diplomatically recognize the Soviet Union until 1933." - it doesn't seem to be incredibly necessary to go into the details of the Russian Revolution, especially after stating that the setting took place in the aftermath of the Revolution. The condemnation of the revolution violence and the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union in 1933 does not seem incredibly pertinent here.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- "West and Jeddy are satirical characters, but the film's satire is affectionate; they are portrayed as well-intentioned and more noble than the Russian criminals." - who says the satire is affectionate? What are the criteria that makes for affectionate satire? While this may have been Kuleshov's intention, the concept of "affectionate satire" is highly variable, and it's probably not necessary to "run back" the initial idea suggested, being that "the characters are satirical... BUT it's okay as [etc.]".
- "As Jeddy learns that Russia does not match his stereotypes, he becomes less of a caricature himself" - what does it mean to be a caricature? The idea of something is or isn't a caricature can vary from person to person, and due to this subjective description, it's unclear what it means to become "less of a caricature himself".
- I reworded this a bit. If you still think it sounds too subjective, I can attribute this interpretation to Milla Fedorova instead of saying it in Wiki voice.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- The article is stable, so no problems on that front.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- The illustrations here look great!
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall: