Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Squirm/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 23 October 2020 [1].

Squirm

edit
Nominator(s): GamerPro64 00:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Late in the evening of September 29, 1975, a sudden electrical storm struck a rural sea coast area of Georgia. Power lines, felled by high winds, sent hundreds of thousands of volts surging into the muddy ground, cutting off all electricity to the small, secluded town of Fly Creek. During the period that followed the storm, the citizens of Fly Creek experienced what scientists believe to be one of the most bizarre freaks of nature ever recorded. This is the story...."

This is the second attempt of having Squirm nominated for Featured Article. Thanks to an extensive Peer Review, I believe that we finally reached the point where this can have a bronze star to its name. GamerPro64 00:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Joe

edit

Coming soon. JOEBRO64 13:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, here goes. Sorry for the wait!

  • "Makeup artist Rick Baker provided special effects for the film, using prosthetics for the first time in his career."
  • "The script was based on an childhood incident in which Lieberman's brother..." I think this should be here for clarity and to line up better with the lede
  • "... after which the project moved very fast swiftly..." "Substitute 'damn' every time you're inclined to write 'very'; your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be." - Mark Twain
  • "Production began in the warmer climate of Georgia in the late fall of November 1975." MOS:SEASONS
  • Disagree. I added that redundancy specifically to deal with the seasonal issue in the rest of that passage and to address the SEASONS problem, because it was a seasonal schedule. Here's the issue. The producers read the script during the summer ... that is ... the project was moving quickly. We don't know in what months they read the script, so we can't avoid saying "summer". The point is they moved quickly when it was warm weather, but then had to move production to the south (Georgia) as fall (colder weather) approached in New England. SEASON is about avoiding ambiguity in the months corresponding to seasons, as they differ between the southern and northern hemisphere. That doesn't mean we can never mention seasonal (weather) issues ... we just have to explain that fall in New England = November, which is a date that we do have. If someone can think of a more elegant way to address this, great ... but we can't remove mention of season and weather-related issues that affected production because of an interpretation of SEASON. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:13, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Principal photography wrapped after five weeks, seven days one of which were was dedicated to..."
  • "... but the film it still received an "R" rating."
  • I'd add the years Swamp Thing and Return of the Living Dead were released in parenthesis next to the titles

Don't have anything else to say. Nice work. JOEBRO64 12:27, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

edit
  • For this sentence, (In the rural town of Fly Creek, Georgia, a powerful storm blows down an overhead power line, leaving the town without electricity.), I would avoid repeating the word "town" twice. Maybe something like, (leaving the area without electricity), to avoid this?
  • I would move the worm farm link to this part, (worm farmer Roger Grimes), earlier in the plot summary.
  • I think these two sentences, (Geri and Mick arrive at Beardsley's house; they do not find him but Geri sees a human skeleton outside the property.), to something like: (After arriving at Beardsley's house, Geri and Mick cannot find him, but Geri sees a human skeleton outside the property.) Something about the current wording seems choppy to me.
  • For this sentence, (Alma, who survived by hiding in a chest comes out of the chest and looks out the window), I would avoid repeating the word "chest" twice. I would just say something like, (Alma, who survived by hiding in a chest, comes out and looks out the window), to avoid this.
  • The word "sandworms" is linked twice in the article, and both instances go to different articles.
  • This part still needs to be addressed. The word "sandworms" is linked twice in the article, with one instance going to Arenicola marina and the other going to Alitta virens, and I find this confusing since it is not clear from the prose that these two words are referring to what I am assuming are two different types of worms. Aoba47 (talk) 21:30, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should AllMovie be italicized in the prose? I am only asking because it is not italicized in the database's Wikipedia article.
  • For this part, (The cinematography was praised, with John Kenneth Muir commending the cinematography and the film's imagery), I would avoid repeating "cinematography" twice in the same sentence, and I have been told in the past to avoid using the "with x verb+ing" sentence structure in featured articles.

I hope this review is helpful. Wonderful work with the article. Once everything is addressed, I will support this for promotion. I always enjoy watching the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode on this movie lol. I hope you are having a great end to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 06:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have made the following edits (here). Feel free to revert anything that you disagree with.
  • These two sentences, (While on the boat, Mick is bitten by a worm. Roger tells him worms attack when electrified.), read rather awkwardly to me as there is rather abrupt transition from a worm attack to an informational bit. I would try to make this part flow a little bit better.
  • I am confused by this sentence, (Mick leaves Geri with Roger so he can tend to his wound), specifically the (he can tend to his wound) part. Why would Mick leave Geri with Roger if Roger was going to tend to his own wound anyway? Is that accurate or should it be (she can tend to his wound) instead? Aoba47 (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not think the sentence about AllMovie's praise of soundtrack fits in the paragraph about negative reviews on the film's production, performances, and direction. It should be kept in the article, but its placement seems rather random to me. Aoba47 (talk) 22:49, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This part, (The original filming location and setting was planned to be New England but this was changed to Port Wentworth, Georgia), is not correct because the film is set in a fictional Georgia town not Port Wentworth.
  • I do not think "idiot" needs to be put in quotation marks.
  • As I said in the previous FAC, I think this sentence, (Squirm was the only film produced by The Squirm Company), is necessary, but I am uncertain about its current placement. I think it seems out of place in a paragraph mostly about the worms, and I think it would be better suited for the section's first paragraph which is more so about the film's development and production.
  • I would recommend cutting the first paragraph of the "Production" section into two, with the first focusing on the film's inspiration and the second on the writing and filming. This part, (He completed a rough draft in six weeks and gave it to producer George Manasse, who saw potential in it.), seems like a good place to start a new paragraph after changing "He" to "Lieberman". The paragraph just seems like a rather large wall of text so I think this separation will be helpful in keeping a reader engaged with the prose.
  • For this part, (He runs off into the woods and Geri tells Mick.), I would clarify what Geri told Mick. If it was about the worm attack in the previous sentence, I'd say something like, (Geri tells Mick about the attack), to be clear.
  • Admittedly, I have only seen the MST3K episode on this movie, but I have a question about this part: (he remembers the worms only come out at night). I rewatched the scene, and he hypothesizes the worms are repulsed by light so I do not this current wording is quite right. I would not say he "remembers" this and he does not directly say the worms only come out at night. The exact line of dialogue is: "See, if I'm right, the only thing holding them back is the light".
  • I rewatched the part right after the tree scene, and I am uncertain about this part: (Mick realizes electricity is still being released from the power lines and that the wet soil is acting as a conductor). I could be missing something as again I have only seen the MST3K episode and not the film itself, but I do not see the part where Mick comes to this conclusion.
  • I am uncertain about this part, (Some retrospective reviews were less than positive), as there is only one less than positive retrospective review so "some" does not seem accurate unless other citations can be added here to better support this claim.
  • The following book (here) has an estimated production budget for the movie. The book was published by ABC-Clio which seems like a credible publisher to me.
    • Yes it says the estimated amount is $470,000. But in the Fangoria article, it mentions they also had a few investors before the Broadway producers. So a majority of the budget is 470K, but I'm not entire sure if having the budget section say "est. $470,000" is standard. GamerPro64 05:12, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The American Film Institute entry mentions planned premieres in Buffalo, New York and New York City. The entry also mentions that the film had four screenings at the Cannes Film Festival, and specifies that Lansbury and Beruh had intentionally invited "non-pro locals” as seat fillers. Are these elements notable enough for inclusion in the article?
    “Papering the house” (filling unsold seats by giving away tickets) is so common in theatre and film that I would not worry about mentioning this. Thanks for the solid review! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:22, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hope my review is helpful and thank you for your patience. Once my comments are addressed, I believe that should be everything, but I would like to do one last read-through tomorrow to make sure as I want to give a thorough review. You have done a wonderful job with the article, and it would be great to see a smaller, cult film get the bronze star. Aoba47 (talk) 01:14, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for addressing everything. I still think there should be a brief sentence in the "Release" section that mentions the film being available digitally as that section already mentions VHS, DVD, and Blu-ray releases. Once that is done, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 15:15, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just don't think mentioning it being on these services are necessary. We don't always have mention of movies being on TV. Nor have I seen other articles mention that they were on Netflix or Hulu or the like. GamerPro64 03:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am still uncertain about mentioning the VHS, DVD, and Blu-ray releases without even a brief part on its digital release at all. The specific names of the services do not need to be used in the prose, but it still seems like a gap in information to mention all of these other ways that the film has been released for public consumption and leave one release method out completely. I can wait to hear other editors' opinions about this, but it does hold me back from supporting. Aoba47 (talk) 18:16, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree with the comparison to "movies being on TV". I personally do not find a digital release to be comparable to television syndication. Aoba47 (talk) 21:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 04:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SG review

edit

In reviewing changes to this point, please let me know if I have missed anything with this reinstatement of one word, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • It looks good to me. I removed "unsuccessful" because I thought it would already be understood from the word "attempt", but it is probably best to as clear as possible to avoid any potential confusion. Aoba47 (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be aware: [2]. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just wait for the result of that discussion. GamerPro64 03:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have been extensively involved at this article since the first FAC, and during the Peer review. At the first FAC, I had concerns that the prose could be better. A good amount of that has been addressed, but I am waiting to see what others think. If others think that the prose is now up to snuff, everything else looks good, per the earlier FAC and PR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:22, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GamerPro64 is there any possibility of describing the character, "Barbara Quinn as Sheriff's Girl" in a less provincial-sounding way? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review: during the peer review and precious FAC, I read every source, and think we can consider this covered already. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from David Fuchs

edit
  • While on the boat, Mick is bitten by a worm, leading to Roger telling him and Geri that worms attack when electrified, showing the two his bitten-off thumb—this sentence stumbled me a bit. For the last part, it's Roger showing his thumb? And it was bitten off by worms previously, as in some time in the past or during the film? How'd regular worms bite off his thumb? Is this really important anyhow?
    • Yes Roger is showing his thumb. And it was bitten off when he was a child because of the electrified worms. I thought it would be worth mentioning to show how violent the worms would end up being. I can remove it. GamerPro64 03:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • My issue is that it's not entirely clear in the sentence how it relates. If you think it's an important detail you could reword the sentence along the lines of something like While on the boat, Mick is bitten by a worm. Roger shows his bitten-off thumb and tells Mick and Geri that worms attack when electrified. so the attack detail follows from the bite and makes it a bit more clear.
  • Mick gets off the boat to tend to his wound, leaving Geri with Roger; he and Alma—likewise here, the "he and Alma" I think refers to Mick, but it's unclear since you mention Roger most proximately.
    • Its Mick. Changed it.
  • Special make-up effects artist Rick Baker created the make-up in New York for R.A. Dow's character Roger, who turns into "Wormface", and made a facial mold using prosthetics, which he had never worked with before. This sentence just kind of runs on. I would start a new sentence after "Wormface".
  • I don't really think you need the explanatory 1975/76 dollar footnotes. I think it's naturally understood the prices are contemporary.
  • I'd reword This version was also released in the United States on Blu-ray by Shout! Factory under its label Scream Factory on October 28, 2014.[14] Squirm was also released on streaming services Prime Video, Tubi, and Shudder. a bit so it's not repeating "was also released" phrasing twice in two sentences.
  • Mick deduces the worms killed Beardsley but cannot figure out why they attacked him.—does this get followed up on in the story? The second part of the sentence suggests there's some reason other than "evil worms attack when electrocuted" but the plot doesn't suggest it.
    • The reason really is because of electricity but at this point Mick and Geri don't realize that there is still electricity in the ground. Mick later remembers a customer mentioning it at the diner he was at earlier so he pieces it all together when the tree falls into the house. GamerPro64 16:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images look fine.
  • Source check forthcoming. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources follow-up:
    • You've got a stray DVD Talk ref where the website isn't wiki linked, whereas it is elsewhere.
    • www.weirdpaul.com should lose the www.
    • JoBlo.com is the only website that's not italicized.
    • I don't see any major issues with the sourcing. The only source I'd see about removing if at all possible is the weirdpaul.com; in the prose it's cited alongside another ref for the same information, and it seems like it'd be better to leave out a primary source for this. Otherwise the sources are all reputable, and I don't have qualms with them being reliable or high-quality in their fields.
    • Spot-checked statements attributed to current refs 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 27, 32, 35, and 38. Didn't spot issues with too-close wording.
      • Ref 4 is used to cite He was also inspired by a news story from Floyds Knobs, Indiana about migrating millipedes invading homes by the hundreds—the source doesn't give a number, and gives the "you could stomp a hundred with a boot"-kind of response which can be credibly taken as hyperbole. I think if you want it as color, include the quote, otherwise leave out the mention of actual numbers of millipedes.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 21:52, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Lee Vilenski

edit

I may end up claiming points towards the wikicup. Hope you don't mind! :P|

I'll take a look at this article, and give some comments on how it meets the FA criteria in a little while. If you fancy doing some QPQ, I have a list of items that can be looked at here - specifically FACs for 2020 World Snooker Championship and 1984 World Snooker Championship Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Squirm/archive2&oldid=985104768"