The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that producers of the 2012 Austrian short film Homophobia raised US$10,100 in 69 days through crowdfunding on Indiegogo?
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AustriaWikipedia:WikiProject AustriaTemplate:WikiProject AustriaAustria articles
This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 15 October 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
1a Review pending 2d concerns. 1b The lede includes a link for $ but it just leads to dollar. Which dollar? The US isn't the only country to use this word and symbol. We have a Canadian dollar and the Aussies have one too. Per MOS:PLOT, the plot shouldn't have citations; the bit about response at the end can be moved to Release, referring to "the viewer" breaks the WP:INUNIVERSE, and the actor names are redundant to the Cast section. The intentions for the ending belong in Production. Also, linking to common dictionary terms such as vomiting and cigarette seems inappropriate when you could link to Austrian Armed Forces. Surprised we don't have a Austria–Hungary border to link to. Background and Production sections can be merged. Credits section isn't typically done.
Verifiable with no original research
2a Thoroughly referenced
2b Major publications are used
2c. Review pending
2d. Some copyright and Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing concerns
3a. Article is quite short, though for a minor short film this can be expected. Covers the main bases (plot, production, release, bits of reception here and there), and controversy
3b. Not a lot off-topic.
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
4. No real POV issues detected
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
5. No edit wars taking place
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio
6. Poster is attributed, but screenshot is claimed as fair use without really serving as anything but decoration
@Ribbet32: Hi there! Thank you very much for taking this on review! I believe I've ammended everything you've pointed out apart from a few things. There is still one ref in the "Plot" section, as it cites the view of Vangardist on the film's setting. Moving on, I've linked "military camp" to Austrian Armed Forces; is that what you wanted? Furthermore, I don't know how to write the thing with the film-specific interpretation in another way, and can you help me with the "Credits" section? Best regards and thanks again; Cartoon network freak (talk) 20:59, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Cartoon network freak: What is a "film-specific interpretation" of the word "homophobia"? Also, is that really 2 different fonts? It looks like the same font to me. How would using 2 different fonts make a point about the interpretation of the word?
With the credits section, I'd just move the ref to the main infobox and for the producers/editor/cinematographer. Ribbet32 (talk) 02:40, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ribbet32: In reply, I've added the ref from the "Credits" section to the infobox, and I've just removed the "film-specific interpretation thing", as it doesn't make any sense even after reading the magazine article a few more times. Thanks; Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:50, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Cartoon network freak: The credits section needs to be removed- the ref is what I suggested could be salvaged from that section. Ribbet32 (talk) 20:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Criteria 2 reviewVangardist ref is missing fields |title=Project Homophobia: A Progressive Way to Make Movie |last=Nolte |first=Astrid . Will have to split the Vangardist ref into multiple footnotes to include page numbers The "hyper-masculine" quote is missing |p=84. "abrupt and gloomy" bit does not seem to appear in the Vangardist source- please provide a page number if it does. "Motivational" casting bit is missing |p=87. "Search engine" quote is missing |p=88. Canon EOS C300 is missing |p=87. $10,000 is missing |p=87. "dynamic Facebook" is missing |p=88. Ribbet32 (talk) 20:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ribbet32: Hi again! I've added the page numbers as you requested; everything I named in the article was included in the issue. The "abrupt and gloomy" ending part was taken from another ref; fixed that now! Best, Cartoon network freak (talk) 21:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
