# Talk:Bionicle: Mask of Light

Talk:Bionicle: Mask of Light/to do

Kopaka Nuva throws his ice blade to knock the Rahkshi into the water. But then he magically has it again when he freezes the water.
He actually has two separate blades.
The first reference claims that the movie has sold 40 million copies.
The cited reference actually says 40 million people have bought Bionicle products, giving no figure for the movie (it was written just 6 days after the release.)

After review, I've determined this article to meet the qualifications for Good Article status. It is well referenced, and is written with a good "out of universe" perspective.
A few notes for further progress:

Keep a close eye on the "in universe" perspective sections, namely, the plot summary. Read Writing about fiction for tips. These sections should be kept concise, and relevance to the 'real world' should be noted wherever possible.
Keep an eye on international issues. Currency should be marked as US$500, instead of just with a $ sign, since this is an international encyclopedia. Likewise, release locations should give enough information for someone anywhere on earth to understand what happened. I'll try to take care of a few of these little issues in a quick copyedit.
Limit the use of fair-use images. I know that, for movies, there aren't many opportunities for non-fair-use images, but keep their use topical, and limited. No picture should be in the article without being next to a relevant paragraph. I think things are OK right now, but the article probably shouldn't have any more fair-use images unless there is a very compelling reason.
Keep up the good work. Please leave a message on my talk page if you would like clarification on my decision. Phidauex 16:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Three years later... I'm delisting this article from the Good Article list as part of the pre-2007 GA Sweeps.  Fully half of this article is an unreferenced poorly written plot summary full of OR. If you disagree, feel free to take the article to Good Article Review. --PresN 18:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The plot for this article is far too long per MOS:Film. This film is only 70 minutes long while much longer films that have quality articles such as Batman and Let the Right One In have managed to shorten the plot. Try to use examples from those as the plot summary here needs to be much shorter. Andrzejbanas (talk) 05:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Shortened. However, I don't think this can go any shorter as there are too many vital details and not everyone is familiar with the Bionicle universe. Is it all right if we stop compressing at this point? Because, I feel that I've already removed a little too much vital information (though they may not appear so at first glance but are necessary if the uninitiated are to know what's going on). Also, these are handicaps that the movies you've mentioned don't have.--Twilight Helryx 21:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
The focus on fiction in these articles is supposed to be kept minimal. Currently, according to this site, we have 990 words in the article. WP:FILMPLOT states that "Plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words. The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction's non-linear storyline, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range." I'm haven't seen this flick and I'm having a bit of trouble following which character is who in the plot summary. It still needs a trim to fit the MOS:Film. Remember the note in WP:Filmplot that says "The plot summary is an overview of the film's main events, so avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, and technical detail.". I think some scene-by-scene breakdowns can be shortened here to make it fit. Any objections? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Nope. And you've just read my mind (although most of scene-by-scene has already been removed). ;) I'll see what I can do, and any help would be greatly appreciated.--Twilight Helryx 20:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I've added links to pages that explain certain terms and characters. Would this suffice or would we still need to add the info in the article?--Twilight Helryx 22:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm busy with a lot of work and have not seen this so I don't know how constructive my help would be! It's still several hundred characters to long for WP:FILMPLOT, so it still needs some chopping down. If I can help, I'll check it out later. Cheers! Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I understand and will do my best to improve it until then. Cheers to you too. =) --Twilight Helryx 02:59, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bionicle: Mask of Light/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 16:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
{{doing}} Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Overall, a solid article (and the first I've heard that they ever made a video for Bionicle—hadn't thought about those toys in years!) First pass comments below:

Prose:
Its events are based on the latter half of the 2002–2003 storyline. — I assume this refers to the storyline of the LEGO toys, but it should be made explicit.
Following Mask of Light, further films based on Bionicle have been released: a direct prequel, Bionicle 2: Legends of Metru Nui, was released in 2004. If this is the only follow-up, it seems weird that it’s not said so straight-forwardly. If it’s not the only followup, which in particular is this one mentioned?
Images:
The fair use rationale of File:Bioniclemask.jpg could use a little more elaboration.
I dunno if File:Buildingbionicle.jpg really fulfills its stated purpose. The internal structure of the 3D models doesn't mean much to me; it's without context. If you want to illustrate the differences and the redesign, it seems an image showing something like a side-by-side of one of the LEGO characters with their film equivalent would be far more effective.
References:
Sources generally look reliable, with some exceptions that seem iffy or I’m unfamiliar with: BZPower.com, Sci Film, and Absolute Write.
Did a spot-check on current refs 1, 11, 15, 21, 33, and didn't notice any issues with close paraphrasing or inaccurate statements.
—Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:23, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

@David Fuchs: I've attempted to address the cover art fair use rational, and since it doesn't serve its purpose have removed the other image (it was just a hangover from the article's original form). I've also attended to those bits of prose you pointed out. As to the source: Absolute Write is a reuptable writer-dedicated blog run by professionals in the area, Sci Film is a defunct online magazine that I think is okay, and BZPower.com is a fan site dedicated to Bionicle. I only used them when the information could not be found elsewhere, and (in the case of Absolute Write and BZPower.com) when it was an original interview/behind the scenes look.  --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok. I'm not sure those sources would stand up to FA standards but for GA they're probably fine. Did a look through again and didn't see any other outstanding issues so I'll go ahead and pass this. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 23:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)