Talk:Daft Punk's Electroma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daft Punk's Electroma article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

[edit] Sources Not Matching Claims

See the crowd walking out of the theatre reference in the last paragraph. Neither 1 or 3 makes that claim. There are also improper citations concerning plot details. Boston2austin 12:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added a reference for the "Reception" information. Just64helpin 16:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Order of text

Wouldn't it be better if the plot summary was the first section and then the history of its released? Just seems weird for the article to go right to the history of the film and then moving to the plot summary. Douglasr007 03:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how it's "weird", since the history documents the making of the film, including development of the story, which would logically lead to the finished product. Just64helpin 10:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)