This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mattisse (talk | contribs) at 22:20, 2 November 2009 (→Not One Less: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:20, 2 November 2009 by Mattisse (talk | contribs) (→Not One Less: comment)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Not One Less
- Nominator(s): rʨanaɢ /contribs 02:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
| Toolbox |
|---|
This article—about a fascinating, strange, and controversial film—has been carefully researched and been through a couple copyedits. I feel it meets all the FA criteria. rʨanaɢ /contribs 02:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Image copyright review: All OK. Stifle (talk) 09:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Comment The toolbox reveals a dead link. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- I saw that too, but when you actually try the link it's fine. This is not the first time I've noticed the toolbox incorrectly marking links as dead; I don't know how exactly that tool works, so I'm not sure would could be causing it. rʨanaɢ /contribs 23:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- I know that when I clicked on it the first time it was dead. However, it seems to have fixed itself. Sorry for the false alarm. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:15, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Comments Very interesting article. The quotations in this sentence are not directly referenced: Zhang accused the festival of not being motivated by artistic concerns, and criticized the Western perception that all Chinese films must be either "pro-government" or "anti-government", referring to it as a "discrimination against Chinese films". —mattisse (Talk) 22:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC)