Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Overdrawn at the Memory Bank/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've listed this article for peer review because I am planning on taking this to Good Article but I feel like I am missing something with how to improve the page. So I am sending this over for Peer Review to get some thoughts on what to do. GamerPro64 02:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

[edit]

Putting this up as a placeholder. If I do not post further comments by this time next week, then please ping me. I recently watched the MST3K episode on this film, and I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of this article. Here are a few quick comments.

I hope these early comments are helpful. I will mostly likely come back to this over the weekend. I would actually be interested to see this movie outside of the MST3K episode because it actually seemed quite interesting. Aoba47 (talk) 11:17, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the past, I have often received a note to avoid the following sentence structure (with x noun verb-ing y). This is done in this part from the lead, with members of the show expressing dislike towards the film. I personally do not have an issue with this type of sentence structure, but I just wanted to raise this to your attention.
  • I do not think Rick's Place should be in italics.
  • In the plot summary, you refer to Aram Fingal by his last name and Apollonia James by her first name. I would be consistent with one way or the other.
  • I would vary the sentence structure of the second paragraph of the "Production and release" section as each of the three sentences is "It..." and I would avoid this type of repetition.
  • I would avoid having single word quotes like "quality". It would be better to paraphrase it. It may also be safe to just use the word without the quotation marks.
  • I believe punctuation marks should be on the outside of the quotation marks unless you are pulling a full quote. For the most part, it is done this way in the article, but these are instances where it is not done, a "tongue-in-cheek and imaginative 90-minute delight." and "certainly inoffensive, occasionally funny and altogether watchable.".
  • I would incorporate the negative Malloch review into the rest of the reception paragraph as I am not sure it necessarily works to put it off as a separate paragraph.
  • In the lead, you say that the film received positive reviews, but I am not sure that is fully supported by the "Reception" sections as there are several instances of more mixed reviews.
  • Is there any more information on the production of the film? I am assuming not since this seems like a more obscure release (at least from understanding), but I just want to double check with you. When I do a Google search, a majority of the coverage seems to be on the MST3K episode instead of the actual film.

This should cover everything in the article. I will turn my attention to your current FAC over the weekend. Let me know if anything needs further clarification and have a great rest of your week. Hopefully other editors will also respond to this peer review. Aoba47 (talk) 05:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]