Squirm is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 14, 2021.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 19, 2020 Good article nominee Listed August 15, 2020 Featured article candidate Not promoted September 16, 2020 Peer review Reviewed October 23, 2020 Featured article candidate Promoted Current status: Featured article

This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force. Horror Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Film: American This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Since this film is very short it should be considered a stub. Might I suggest expanding the plot and production, after all the make up effects are done by Oscar winning make-up artist Rick Baker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paleface Jack (talk • contribs) 18:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you mean "this article," not " this film." The film is standard feature-length. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2C99:6D0:E8F7:93F:4E97:7B4F (talk) 22:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Squirm/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 17:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fun topic. I've not seen the film, but happy to offer a review. Sorry you've had to wait so long! Josh Milburn (talk) 17:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "While in town getting ice for the refrigerator" While who is in town? At the moment, the page reads as if the worms are the ones getting ice.
  • Fixed. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "Mick believes he unintentionally released the worms" Who is the "he" in this sentence?
  • Mick. I can change it to himself. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "and shows them his thumb was bitten by one as a child when Willie experimented with electricity at night" Who is "them"? I thought it was just the two of them?
  • Its Mick and Geri. Clarified it. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "they're fooling around in, and people at Quigley's are also attacked and eaten" they're and fooling around are informal; what is Quigley's?
  • Reworked. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "before climbing onto a tree, where they stay until morning" Again, who is "they"?
  • reworked. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• What's your source for the cast? The credits on the film itself?
  • Yes. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "The Art of Film" Notable? Don't be scared of redlinks!
  • Does not look to be. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "He completed the rough draft in six weeks before giving it to producer George Manasse, who saw potential in it, and showed it to then-independent Broadway producers Edgar Lansbury and Joseph Beruh, who bought Squirm in 1975. Though they had only a few investors, both of them still invested $470,000 into the project." I think this could be smoother.
  • reworked. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "The original filming location was set in New England[1] but instead changed to Port Wentworth, Georgia[2] due to the former's weather conditions during autumn." Filmed in? Set in? Both?
  • It was originally going to be filmed and set in New England but the weather made them go to Georgia instead. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok - I think this could be clearer in the article. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "which itself spawned numerous rip-offs called "Jawsploitation films" of which Squirm has been classified as." Again, could be much smoother!
• "The film was notable for having been made a year after the release of Steven Spielberg's blockbuster hit Jaws, which itself spawned numerous rip-offs called "Jawsploitation films" of which Squirm has been classified as.[3][4] As noted by filmmaker and literary critic John Kenneth Muir, the film also reflects some of the attitudes and fears that were prevalent at the time, specifically, the public's unease on what he called "man's continued pillaging and pollution of the Earth".[5]" Just a thought: this feels like something that might belong in an analysis section. It's probably not enough on its own for a section, but if if there's anything else out there...
  • Honestly this and the previous bullet point was edited in by someone else so I might as well move all that to the Reception section. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "The sound of the worms screaming" This hasn't been mentioned before - I wonder if it's worth noting in the plot section?
  • The worms screaming aren't really pivotal to the movie. They mostly are there when there are close-up shots of the worms at the beginning and near the end of the movie. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "Counts also noted similarities to Squirm with Straw Dogs for its theme of "masculine ideals", comparing the two male leads having to play the hero in their situation and demeanor. The reviewer, however, believed that the film did not give the impression that Don Scardino's character grew into a "man" after his experience." Also potentially something that belongs in an analysis section - again, just noting!
  • Threw in a section of analysis. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• The reception section is a bit he-said-she-said - it's not the end of the world for GAC, but it might be worth trying to arrange it a little more thematically. (I don't mean to blow my own horn, but I think the way I've done it at The Turn of the Screw (2009 film) is pretty good.)
• "Pittsburgh musician Weird Paul Petroskey created an entire album, Worm in My Egg Cream, dedicated to the "worm in the egg cream" scene and making extensive use of samples from the film. All 16 tracks on the album are titled "Worm in My Egg Cream".[29]" Brilliant. This is exactly the sort of nonsense we need more of.
  • Is that sarcasm? GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, not at all - sorry! I just thought that was a great fact. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:48, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "A Case of Spring Fever" Again, worthy of a redlink?
  • Linking it leads to List of Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes. Though it is a pretty iconic short from the show. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can't be having that - I've created an article. Anything famous enough to be parodied on The Simpsons is surely notable! Josh Milburn (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• It looks like Craddock is the editor of the Videohound book, not the author; did he definitely write the review? This should be clear in the text and the reference.
  • Does look like he reviewed it. GamerPro64 23:39, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Bit of a pet peeve, as people seem to get it wrong on Wikipedia a lot, but cited the editors of Cycles, Sequels, Spin-offs, Remakes, and Reboots as the authors. I've fixed this, but it's something to be aware of in the future!
• The Maltin book also seems to be multi-author; again, are you sure that review is Maltin's own? I'd recommend citing the chapter/entry rather than the book as a whole.
  • Yes Maltin reviewed it. Also the source cites the page itself. GamerPro64 23:39, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Is "Fangora" a typo?
  • Yes. Fixed. GamerPro64 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Have you had a sift through Google Scholar? I'm getting a lot of hits, and a good few of them are interesting-looking, but I've not dug too deeply (so I may be wrong).

Generally looks good to me; some of the writing is a bit choppy, but not at all bad for GAC purposes. Please check my edits. I very rarely recommend adding non-free content (and I'm not doing so here, just floating an idea) but an image to illustrate the film's special effects (perhaps Wormface?) might not be a terrible addition. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I thought about adding an image of the Wormface scene but couldn't figure out where to fit it in. GamerPro64 23:40, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still working through my comments? Let me know when you're ready for me to take another look. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you can do a another look around. GamerPro64 21:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have expanded the analysis section with more of this "revenge of nature" stuff, as that seems to be important - my Googling suggests that that's where this film finds a mention in scholarly analyses. I am struggling a little with the second paragraph, though. Could you perhaps revisit? Other than that, I think this is looking pretty good. There's still some choppy writing in places, but that's OK for GAC. Please double-check my edits. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:38, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I flip-flopped the two sentences in the second paragraph to flow better. GamerPro64 17:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That does actually read a bit better. I also like the quote you've added from Lieberman. I suspect there's more to be said in an analysis section, but that would probably be a reason to oppose at FAC rather than GAC. I think this is now about where it needs to be - I'm sure it'll be a very useful article for lots of readers. Good working with you! Josh Milburn (talk) 09:42, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GamerPro64 were you first going to make these changes I mentioned at PR? I can't see that they were done ??? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no. I think the page didnt save them. I can fix that. GamerPro64 00:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes! Glad we caught that, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To bring up the part about how the earthworms in Rogers truck got electrified, I would say they Roger got the worms that were already electrified. Honestly its not really explained in the movie and we might have noticed a plot hole. Either way I think removing the word starts would make things easier. GamerPro64 00:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]