This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Star WarsWikipedia:WikiProject Star WarsTemplate:WikiProject Star WarsStar Wars
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
Capitalisation of "rebel": The word is sometimes capitalised, sometimes not throughout the article. I've mostly stayed away from the franchise, but are the rebels a recognised entity, and thus capitalised, or just a catch-all term for those against the Empire? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ton vs. tonne: The article uses both somewhat frequently. As tonne is a measure using the metric system, maybe it can be put through {{convert}} like measurements elsewhere in the article? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I struggle with the convert stuff because I don't know the correct alternatives between metric and imperial. I have checked the source book and the "Around fifty tonnes of dendritic salt mixed" is specifically "tons" in the book not tonnes, my bad. Similarly "teel frame from 112 tons" is "tons" and "that weighed 4–5 tonnes each" is "tons" as well. I've corrected these. "and 80 feet (24 m) long, weighing 23 tons" is "tons". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkwarriorblake (talk • contribs)
Done. I rarely expand original text, but I think Recruitment occurred over several months from late 1977 onwards should be fine. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As filming was about to begin in January 1979 [...] Already edited. Perhaps principal photography works better than "filming"? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was relatively small and portable [...] Small and portable relative to what? It seems like the comparison's being made to cumbersome equipment a few sentences up, but I'm not sure. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A Fox employee recommended Finse, Norway.Wikilink removed. Not really a copyedit issue, but you might want to wikilink "Fox" to its relevant article to provide more context. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A shot of Luke riding his Taun Taun mount on Hoth was intended to open Empire as far as January 1980 [...] Is the month and year necessary? It makes it strange to transition into the clause past the comma, and I think it would sound fine without it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The 8-foot (2.4 m) tall full-scale Taun Taun was built at Elstree's prop department. Was it built by the people who normally work in that department? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Reworded it so that the team used the space to build the model. I also changed the following sentence to better clarify the original plan to ship it overseas versus what actually happened. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The set's scale was such [...] I think an adjective would be useful here. The set was big enough that [...], perhaps? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[...] contemporary animatronics were not sophisticated enough, and they at one point tried to dress up a monkey [...] Emphasis added. Who's "they"? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't say who "we" is but I've rewritten it to not require it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkwarriorblake (talk • contribs)
Done by requester. Still a little hesitant about using quotes around something that isn't quoted here, but it resolves the problem of asserting something in Wikipedia's voice. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The special effects team was led by Richard Edlund and Brian Johnson in completing the effects, at a cost of $8 million. Minor nitpick, but was it the team or the special effects that cost $8 million in expenses? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tentatively done. I made the expenses the bigger picture so that readers can infer that the team made up a part of the cost rather than the entire thing. How's it look? Done. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That makes me think it's Kurtz and his peers. I shy away from using "filmmakers", as it is, in my opinion, a rather nebulous term that could apply to anyone who directly contributed to the film at any point in the project. Suggestion: The sentence before it is The production was so expansive that by June 1979, the production had to ration the labor they could expend on building sets as there were no other tradespeople available in the industry (emphasis added). I think it would make sense if the part I italicised was described differently (maybe executive team?) and joined with the sentence in question. Something like: [...] the executive team had to [...] in the industry, and it considered bringing in workers from Italy and Spain, perhaps? Kurtz was a producer for the project, so I believe "executive team" is a more-than-accurate description of the decision-making body. Done. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cool! I've resolved those last two points, and I'll give it another look a few hours from now to make any last-minute changes, if any. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:12, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, all done! Fascinating article and topic, very well-researched. I've left my comments below and I will place this article on hold for seven days so you can address them. --Cerebellum (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Criteria
Prose: The prose is good, I made minor copy edits throughout but feel free to revert them if they are not improvements. I've left a few comments below with other suggestions.
References: The referencing is thorough, you do rely on Rinzler a lot but I don't think it's a problem since you also consulted other sources. I like how you used contemporary news articles like the NYT.
Coverage: At times, when you go into detail about the casting and filming, this reads more like an article about the development of the movie then one about special effects specifically. However, I think it is okay since you use the information about casting and filming to provide context for the VFX. The only things I think are missing are why Lucas shut down ILM after Star Wars, and the fact that the film won an academy award for the special effects.
Neutral: Yes.
Stable: Yes.
Illustrated: No. I think you need some kind of images, maybe the film poster or pictures of some of the people who were involved.
Comments
Development: However, his special effects company Industrial Light & Magic (ILM) had shuttered after production on Star Wars Was there a reason for this? It seems strange that he would shut down the studio if he was planning to make a sequel.
Development: some of them founding a separate effects company, Apogee, Inc., under John Dykstra I recommend either removing this or making it a separate sentence, right now the sentence is pretty long.
Sets: Real locations were scouted for the film, including Central Africa, Kenya, and Scandinavia for the bog planet Dagobah, and for Hoth. I think the sentence could be clear, I recommend Central Africa and Kenya for the bog planet Dagobah, and Scandinavia for Hoth.
Sets: Sets were the single biggest expense at $3.5 million This seems to contradict the lead which says that the VFX cost $8 million.
Hoth: 12 Taun Taun shots were needed Per MOS:NUMNOTES, avoid starting a sentence with a figure. Same goes for 100 pieces of film were used altogether.
Hoth: The Empire Strikes Back says tauntaun, this article says Taun Taun. Which one is right?
Ships: matted in to avoid creating a substantially large set to create the appearance of vast distances. I think this could be smoother, I recommend matted in to create the appearance of vast distances without a substantially large set.
Ships: the 18-inch Millennium Falcon ($10,000).[155] The Falcon model was about 2 feet (0.61 m) Was it 18 inches or 2 feet?
Reception/influence: I think you should say a bit about the reception of the special effects. According to the main movie article they were were lauded as "breathtaking",[238] "ingenious",[237] and visually dazzling, and Brian Johnson's Wikipedia page says that a special Academy Award was created for them. --Cerebellum (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I've capitalised all instances of "Rebel". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Done by requester. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Tentatively done. I made the expenses the bigger picture so that readers can infer that the team made up a part of the cost rather than the entire thing. How's it look?
Suggestion: The sentence before it is