"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?
"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.
"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?
"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. GamerPro6423:10, 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. GamerPro6423:10, 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!
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.
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.
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.
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 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]
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]