Wikipedia:Peer review/The Lord of the Rings (1978 film)/archive2

The Lord of the Rings (1978 film)

MUCH improved since the last peer review. A lot of new information has been added, and all of the issues discussed in the previous peer review have been dealt with. What's the concensus, guys? (Ibaranoff24 00:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC))

• You should try to merge the trivia into the article or delete overall per WP:TRIV. Also the sountrack section seems quite out of place, I would rather wish to see it as prose in the Music sub-section in the Production section. Lastly, the lead could benefit from some expansion. - Tutmosis 16:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Okay, I moved the information about the soundtrack album to its own article and linked it from the "Music" section on the film's article, I moved some of the trivia into the main article, and I deleted the rest, because I couldn't find anywhere where it would be suitable to place it. (Ibaranoff24 19:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC))

• Can "Differences from the book" get some footnotes so that it doesn't look like original research? It probably could also be compressed a bit since it's not too important. Can the 'Music' sub-section be expanded a bit to include what the music score for the film actually sounded like? Thanks, the article is looking great although I still think the lead could be expanded. After this, the prose is the final issue to be dealt with. - Tutmosis 20:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Lead - expanded. (Ibaranoff24 06:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC))

• I think the Plot subsection could do with condensing a bit - it seems a bit long at the moment. And the lead should be a bit longer: it should include something about the reception of the film. Apart from that, the prose is the main issue to be dealt with. Oh, and a few of the images need fair use rationales (and I don't think fair use images are supposed to be uploaded in high-res). Trebor 20:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Fair use rationale - done. (Ibaranoff24 23:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC))

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 22:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Took a look at the suggestions and improved on what I could. (Ibaranoff24 06:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC))