This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I find it hard to believe there were no negative reviews/aspects of the film. For neutrality purposes, please try to incorporate some more critical reviews
Looking at the negative ones on Rotten Tomatoes, they are from sources we generally do not rely upon on Wikipiedia, which is why I didnt include them.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How important are the "Film Threat Award This!" or the "Jim Thorpe Independent Film Festival" awards? If they're not really not that noteworthy, then I don't think they should be included
Sources: While I had my doubts about a number of the sources used in the article, I realized almost all of them are interviews with the director or someone else. I guess this is fine but please make sure everything is properly attributed. Such sources include:
This is more of a drive-by reply as I cannot address all the critiques here today but will be more in-depth tomorrow. The cast listing does not necessarily need to be sourced as many other GA and FA articles do not do so and mostly give that information in their production sections, which I have. Changing the word B movies to "B movie" creates a nonsensical language as B movies as a whole was inspiration.
On to the sources, Nightmarish Conjurings, and CBR (Comic Book Resources) have been used in a couple of GA articles from me and others in the past with no problems and are reliable within reason. As you have said interviews need to be attributed properly and I will get working on that tomorrow. Film Threat and Jim Thorpes Awards are there cause they are notable enough to have inclusion. I had to leave out a lot of other awards and screenings to not be too extensive but those were the ones that had some notability for inclusion. I will do a deep dive into the sources tomorrow to confirm the reliability and remove the lesser ones when necessary.--16:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC) Paleface Jack (talk) 16:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The Lake Michigan Monster's visual style was developed out of necessity," --I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. What do you mean by "visual style"? The cinematography? The special effects? And I don't think "out of necessity" is needed. Please re-write to make it more clear.
"Seafield attempts to reenlist Dick and Nedge, but due to a conversation about pears, they deny his offer." --> Yeah, you're going to need to explain this a bit better for those who haven't seen the movie
"Underwater sequences proved to be the most difficult to shoot, as Tews stated in an interview with horror magazine Rue Morgue, the camera operators had a limited supply of oxygen and could only shoot for a short amount of time before surfacing for air" --- >Underwater sequences proved to be the most difficult to shoot. As Tews stated in an interview with horror magazine Rue Morgue, the camera operators had a limited supply of oxygen and could only shoot for a short amount of time before surfacing for air
"The film was screened extensively at various film festivals in 2019, starting on February 2, where was screened" --> Did you mean, "where it was screened"?
"cast member Erick West, who designed the claws" Y
"underwater sequences proved to be the most difficult to shoot, as Tews stated in an interview with horror magazine Rue Morgue, the camera operators had a limited supply of oxygen and could only shoot for a short amount of time before surfacing for air." Y
"Development of the film's screenplay was influenced by Tews' love of the British comedy group Monty Python and the earlier episodes of the television series The Simpsons." Y
"The resulting design was noted by one critic as resembling the early works of cinematic pioneer Georges Méliès" Y
"Online publication Film Threat's Joshua Speiser referred to it as "[a] love letter to B-grade 1950s monster movies", commending the humor and Ed Wood-style visual aesthetic" Y
Hi, @Paleface Jack. You have done a decent job improving the article so far. Since I don’t have more comments for you as of now, I think I would want a second opinion. To be honest, I’m not any kind of expert on film articles, so it would be nice to get a fresh pair of eyes on this article in case I missed something. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 18:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My first main concern relates to the questionable sources used in the article. While many of these sources are interviews (which is generally fine for things like the director said X), there are also non-interview sources used in the reception section. Such sources include nightmarishconjurings.com, johnnyalucard.com, horrorgeeklife.com, and MovieWeb (see WP:VALNET). There is also a WP:DUEWEIGHT concern with these sources. Additionally, Blu-Ray is used as a source (see WP:RSP/BLURAY).
NightmarishConjurings I have personally used for a previous GA nomination, Possum without any trouble to its validity. The JohnnyAlucard site is the domain of Kim Newman and a confirmed professional reviewer on Rotten Tomatoes and elsewhere so I am not worried about that source either. The only one I feel needs additional eyes would be the HorrorGeekLife one, so until we get confirmation I shall reserve my opinions on that source.--Paleface Jack (talk) 14:57, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My second concern is that there doesn’t seem to be any negative reviews or criticism in the reception section. That seems a bit unusual to me.Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 18:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are negative reviews, unfortunately all the ones I have seen have been from questionable sources and cannot be included on Wikipiedia otherwise.--Paleface Jack (talk) 14:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Also, after looking over it again, I think MovieWeb is fine as a source since that article was written prior Valnet’s acquisition of the website. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 05:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I’m still seeing a citation to horrorgeeklife (ref 27). Also, I’m still a bit skeptical of Nightmarish Conjurings. If you post about it to WP:RSN and if there’s consensus it’s a reliable source then I’ll pass the article. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Nightmarish Conjurings is not a Tomatometer-approved publication. Reviews from this publication only count toward the Tomatometer® when written by the following Tomatometer-approved critic(s): Caitlin Kennedy, DarkSkyLady, Dev Shea, Dolores Quintana, Jessica Scott, Julieann Stipidis, Kellie Haulotte, Lindsay Traves, Michelle Swope, Molly Henery, Sarah Musnicky, Shannon McGrew."
Since they have approved Scott and McGrew, this should be sufficient. As for HorrorGeekLife, I have replaced it with a source from the festival itself. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking over Nightmarish Conjurings and my GA article for Possum, the source is reliable within the parameters of GA and the authors cited in this article are recognized as certified (and reliable) reviewers on Rotten Tomatoes. Paleface Jack (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because of that, I would really need to see better evidence of reliability given that their about section is a single sentence with no posted editorial team, editorial polices, or any evidence of editorial control (making the source WP:QS). Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 15:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking over it, and some of the controversy McGrew has had even though she is founder of Nightmarish Conjurings (a Horror Fanzine), I will remove those for now cause they seem a little off center compared to the other sources. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.