Wikipedia:Peer review/The Texas Chain Saw Massacre/archive3

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I wish to withdraw the nomination for now, until such time when I am more readily available to respond to comments.--The Taerkasten (talk) 18:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I've listed this article for peer review because after two years of work, I am hoping to gain constructive feedback in a way that will allow me to further improve this article before I send this to FAC.

Thanks, The Taerkasten (talk) 12:39, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• There appear to be more references available to be used in the article; they are listed here. Are they too difficult to find? Erik (talk | contribs) 21:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I've forgotten about those, although I'm not sure what this article needs is more references. I'm not the best person to utilise those refs, as my time will be restricted. In all honesty, I don't know where this article is going to go, I'm the only one constantly editing it, and with soon-to-be limited time I'm not going to be able to watch over the article for at least 4 days. Whether this article ever reaches FA is doubtful.--The Taerkasten (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

One of the Featured Article criteria is that the article should be comprehensive about the topic. This article is in solid shape already to inform the readership. From what I can tell, though, there is still more critical analysis available. It's not surprising since this is a very iconic film, and there is a lot that can be read into it. For comparison, see American Beauty (film), which is a 1999 film which has not been around that long and is probably not "iconic", and it has a lengthy interpretations section. This film would exceed that, probably to the point of having a sub-article—something like Interpretations of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, when I first saw this film, I had no idea how influential it really was, and how much analysis was made of it. I first want to get the main article to FA though, and I might need help getting started with the sub-article of interpretation, there's a link to my userspace version in my main user page (a stub), but I don't really have the time to work on it now.--The Taerkasten (talk) 20:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Quick comment: I am reading the article and will post some general review comments shortly. One quick point from the lead: why is "ed gein" in lower case - is this simply a typo? Brianboulton (talk) 08:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

No it was vandalism, since been removed.--The Taerkasten (talk) 11:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment I know peer review is backlogged and quite busy at the moment, and I myself will have limited time, if any, to make improvements on this article, until the beginning of June, where my exams will have finished, so if anybody wants to help out with the article, I'd be grateful.--The Taerkasten (talk) 16:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton: In view of the above, I will post the few comments that I have made on the early parts of the article, and won't continue for the time being. I suggest you close the review and resubmit it in June when you're ready. My comments can then be recovered from the archive.

• Lead
  • "as well as perceived lies of the American government." Would read better as "the perceived lies". It may be worth clarifying that the American government in question was the Nixon administration.
  • Some explanation required of the meanings of "R-rating" and "PG-rating"
  • Third paragraph: "theatrically" looks the wrong word choice here, since its general meaning is something quite different. Why not say "to cinemas"?
  • "...foreign jurisdictions"; why not "foreign countries"?
  • "It drew mixed critical reception initially, receiving both praise and criticism regarding the atmosphere, story, characters, and graphic content..." There is repetition here—a mixed critical reception means receiving both praise and criticism—so the sentence could read: "Initially it drew a mixed critical reception regarding the atmosphere, story, characters, and graphic content..."
  • The repetition in the next sentence "Despite the mixed critical reception..." could be avoided by "Despite the critical uncertainty..."
  • Why the use of the obscure Greek term? There must be more idiomatic ways of making the point.
• Plot
  • "Sally Hardesty (Marilyn Burns) and her brother Franklin (Paul A. Partain) travel with three friends..." The friends should be identified.
  • "At sunset, Sally's boyfriend Jerry (Allen Danziger) heads out..." Heads out from where? Was he one of the "three friends"?

Brianboulton (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I found some time to edit, most of the suggestions have been taken care of, although I believe the ratings are explained in the release section of the article.--The Taerkasten (talk) 19:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)