Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
The plot is too long and is also poorly written. It needs to be trimmed and copy edited by someone who has seen the film. AIRcorn (talk) 01:10, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Aircorn: Just because the plot is too long and poorly written, the complete article should not be taken for a review. Mention if you have any other concerns. Btw, I have not seen the movie myself nor associated with this article by any means. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:42, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prose is criteria 1a so it is a valid reason to review. I have not seen the the film either so it makes it difficult for me to trim the plot myself. This is exacerbated by the fact that the prose is so poor I could not work out what was meant. AIRcorn (talk) 19:40, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Harshrathod50 and Vivvt: I will be away for two weeks soon so if you have any further questions you can let me know in the next few days. I will look at closing this when I return. Apart from the plot there are issues with the reception section. Currently it is a bit of a WP:quote farm. You might like to look at Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections for a better idea on how to write these. Cheers AIRcorn (talk) 01:29, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If pedestrian writing is the only issue this GA has, we can just have the article copyedited by the Guild of Copy Editors. Patience, Slightlymad (talk) 12:06, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• There seems to be some misunderstanding with how this process works. If it just needed copyediting then I would do it myself as I have for many other poorly written articles. The trouble is that I can't as I have not seen the film and the prose is so bad that I am struggling to make out what the plot is trying to say. The reassessment has been open for over a month and little progress has been made to the plot. The tag itself has also been on for nearly a year now. Being delisted is not a big deal, it just loses the green spot. It can be nominated again easily enough once the issues are sorted. I will not wait for a copy edit from a guild and am thinking at this stage that the best option is to delist to allow editors time to work on it without a reassessment hanging over the article. AIRcorn (talk) 11:02, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delisted Still more work needed. Feel free to renominate at WP:GAN when you feel it is back up to standard. AIRcorn (talk) 08:10, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]