Talk:Late Spring

Late Spring received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Film: Japanese / Core Start‑class

	Film portal 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the Japanese cinema task force.
	This article is on the project's core list.

Suggestions

All right. After a notification on my talk page, I propose we should make a few suggestions to the talk page to comply with WP:MOSFILM and relevant guidelines. Here are a few suggestions:

Lead section - needs to be three-four paragraphs.
Plot section - may need to be between 400-700 words per WP:FILMPLOT
Production section - needs to ~~be created and~~ include principal photography dates as well as a music section.
Cast section - may need to include descriptions of the characters and use the "actor as character" format for cast members.
Reception - may need to be merged into a consolidated section with applicable critical reception and box office subsections, as well as home media.
Miscellaneous - A theatrical poster may be added into the infobox as well.

Hope these help. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I have tightened the Lead section, changing it from four paragraphs to three.

The Plot section is almost exactly 600 words, well within the recommended 400-700 word range.

I cannot determine from my sources the actual dates of production, just the release date. If this film corresponds to traditional Japanese practice at the time, it was probably filmed just a few months or even weeks before its September 1949 release. As to the music, I intend to add a very short section about it, though there is not much to say. The models you seem to have in mind when you request all this information are recent films in which many production details are routinely publicized, and music scores frequently released as soundtrack albums. This is generally not the case for films of the era of Late Spring, particularly non-US films.

Descriptions of the characters are not at all necessary, as the Plot section summarizes the characters and their relationships quite well, and additional information on major and minor characters (e.g., their relationship to tradition) is also provided later in the article.

I have consolidated the Reception subsections within a "Reception and legacy" section. But "Home media" remains a separate section as it is just home video release information and has nothing to do with the film's critical reception and/or influence. I don't have any box office information for either the film's Japanese or US releases. Again, widely publicizing such box office receipts is a common characteristic of contemporary movies, not those of the late 1940s.

I think the screenshot I have chosen for the infobox conveys the charm of both the film and the leading lady, whereas the poster which was in the infobox previously did not.

I intend to request a Peer Review of the article. Thanks.

Dylanexpert (talk) 01:47, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there an Ozu bio?

This has a rather long biography of the director in the article considering it is about a film. Why is it necessary to duplicate the Ozu article? Also, it seems a bit ignorant since Yasujiro Ozu was in the Japanese military during WWII. It is not too surprising he didn't make many films during this period. JoshuSasori (talk) 12:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the fact that about a dozen projects have made me too busy to give sufficient time to the article and to your comments. Let me make several points in response. First, your complaint is contradictory: you are simultaneously saying that there is too much biography in the article and not enough. Second, my biographical material in this article is not a copy of the Yasujiro Ozu article (which I did not edit): it is all based on my own research, not a rehash of somebody else's research. Third, the biographical material was, in my view, completely necessary to establish the situation in the Japanese film industry and the shomingeki genre and Ozu's place within the industry. (Note that I included almost no personal biographical material on Ozu, just his professional experience, and nothing after 1949, when Late Spring was released.) Finally, as to your mention of the absence of any reference to Ozu's military service, I deliberately deleted my references to it. If you check previous versions of the article, I did include a long footnote describing it in detail. However, I deleted all that because I thought that that level of biographical detail was too much for the reader and couldn't be justified. It should be obvious from the range and depth of the literature referenced in the article that I know Ozu's life story inside and out. So to call my deliberate omission "ignorance" is a bit rude! Dylanexpert (talk) 04:02, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "shomingeki", please see my comments on the talk page of the shomingeki article. I've reverted out the changes. Regarding the bio, my own preference is not to reduplicate contents. I don't think that saying it seems ignorant necessarily refers to the person who wrote it being ignorant but simply that the way it is phrased is not good. JoshuSasori (talk) 08:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should not link to "creative reworkings" and similar fan material

From Wikipedia:External links:

Links normally to be avoided...Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)

I apologize for calling these "garbage links" and this was unqualified rudeness on my part, however, "Creative reworkings of the film" are fan material, and I believe I am on solid ground saying they are not suitable links for Wikipedia. JoshuSasori (talk) 03:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, a VERY fine article

In my humble opinion: If this were more thesis driven, it could easily appear as an academic article. A LOT of work went clearly into writing this. I find it very extensive in summarizing the various discussions about the film, very well structured, extremely useful (e.g. on Japanese cultural background). If I had a say about it I would definitely rank it as a very evolved piece. 178.191.203.222 (talk) 10:25, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removing edits about writing of the script

DylanExpert, please justify removing all the edits I put in from the Kaneto Shindo book about the writing of the script. JoshuSasori (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]