Wikipedia:Peer review/The Star Wars Holiday Special/archive1

The Star Wars Holiday Special edit

This is a relatively obscure made-for-TV movie from the late 70's. However, I've worked on it extensively since around March. It covers a large amonut of information and seems comprehensive. Though, I reallize it's WAY too long, too detailed, and too fanboyish. I'm requesting that someone give me tips on what elements of the article can be improved. Thanks. The Wookieepedian 12:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is rather long for the subject matter, particularly the plot section. But there are probably some people who would enjoy that. Perhaps the plot could be broken up into 2-3 sub-sections? If you want this to be a FA, the bulleted lists will need to be replaced with prose (or tables) wherever possible. Otherwise it seems fine, at least to me. — RJH 17:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! The Wookieepedian 22:50, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Except for a few uses of contractions, like "didn't", the writing is great. Consider re-formating the beginning of the article. The setting is discussed twice and there are two one-paragraph sections (might make a decent two paragraph section). The "Story" and "Lucasfilm/media uses and statements" sections are long. When you re-format the article consider the importance of the sections relative to their length and relative to each other. Try for consistency, currently there are two very short sections followed by a huge section (but the pictures help make it seem shorter). The "Segments" section has no text. Write an overview/introduction if the section is going to use sub-sections to discuss its theme (eg. What about the segments?). Why the sudden change in article structure with the "facts about copies of the Holiday Special" and "Lucasfilm/media uses and statements" bullet lists? they are already complete sentences, why not make a paragraph or incorporate them into the article? is the latter section made entirely of bullets? Consider using a table for "Airing dates and locations" since each bullet has similar comparative data. Why does the title section have three one-sentence paragraphs. Probably be a better stated in one paragraph (then consider if the one-paragraph section is the best place for that info). wow this is a long article. Two more sections made entirely of bullets. Another section without any text. Do not be afraid to tell the reader where the references were used (a reader does not want to go through 20 external links to verify one piece of info). I hope there are not any unreferenced quotes in there. Anyways, this is a great article, just needs to format itself to keeps the reader reading despite its length. --maclean25 08:43, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the help! Those are great suggestions! It's nice to see suggestions on improving this. I've worked on it for quite a while, and want it to work well as representing this film. The Wookieepedian 07:38, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Way too many images -- about 75% need to go. —jiy (talk) 09:03, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The story section is indeed very long and detailed, and unless I missed it, does not mention that the Wookies speak Wookie, which surely is a noteable feature? Very well done overall, and I agree that the spacing and positioning of the images helps break up the "endless text" feeling the article might otherwise have. I still advise trimming small details of action, as opposed to plot, wherever possible. KillerChihuahua 19:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I damn well expected better given your name, but congrats on only having a single instance of the horrible blight of wookie in the article ;) (fixed it!). On an interesting note, it is the only word I've found whose misspelling returns more google hits than its actual spelling. Sherurcij 14:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's truely stupifying. I agree that it's too long and in some places it's rather redundant. Perhaps you could also mention that at one point in the show the viewer hears nothing but wookieenese (whatever the technical term is) for upwards of 20 minutes without reprieve? I'm left speechless that anyone could have derived that much content from the Holiday special though. --Zytsef 17:47, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Strange things can happen when you're a holiday special masochisist like me. ;) But seriously guys, thanks for the comments, I'll attempt to incorporate all of them into the article. The Wookieepedian 11:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]