# Talk:May You Stay Forever Young

This review is transcluded from Talk:May You Stay Forever Young/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
This article is well-notable, shares strong contextual details (protest setting, censorship, festival release) and has credible sources. However, the lead should preview its controversies and critical reception more fully; more independent reviews or analysis are needed; and cultural significance in Hong Kong protest cinema should be expanded. These are fixable within the hold period. Crystalite13 (talk · contribs) 01:37, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Prince of Erebor Crystalite13 (talk) 01:39, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
Hello Crystalite13. Thank you so much for taking on this review! Would you mind clarifying how I might improve the content?
The lead currently mentions the censorship and ban of the film: "In May 2021, the film was submitted for review to the Office for Film, Newspaper, and Article Administration but was not approved, marking it as the first film banned from screening in Hong Kong following the amendment of the Film Censorship Ordinance", and also summarizes the critical reception and accolades: "The film won a NETPAC Award and received generally positive reviews from critics for its subject matter, realistic portrayal of protesters, and aesthetics, though it faced criticism for its narrative and thematic depth". Would you like me to include the mention of its ban in Malaysia or the criticism from Pro-Beijing newspapers?
As for more independent reviews and analyses, I have already conducted a thorough search for sources both online and offline while writing this article. The 74 sources currently cited are everything I could find about this film. The eight reviews in the critical reception section encompass all reliable reviews available, and the themes section includes analysis from Liu Wai-tong, Catherine Weng, Wu Rwei-ren, David Chan, Pony Ma, and Enoch Tam, which I have captured all the perspectives they provided in their articles or essays.
Regarding the "cultural significance in Hong Kong protest cinema", I am uncertain what you mean. I assume you are referring to the third paragraph in the Themes and styles section, where Chan, Ma, and Tam discuss how May You Stay Forever Young is part of a new wave of films and its potential impact. However, as noted, these analytical essays are the only sources I could locate, and I am not sure I can expand on them further.
I am not sure if you have found some sources that I have missed and are implying this in a polite way. If you were suggesting that I might have overlooked some potential sources, I would appreciate it if you could share them here so I can add them to the article. Thank you so much! —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 11:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response — I appreciate that you’ve done such a comprehensive search and clarified what’s already covered. Regarding the “cultural significance” point, I was referring to whether the article contextualizes the film’s place in Hong Kong cinema more broadly — e.g., its influence, style, or relation to similar protest-era films. If the current sources already cover that sufficiently, that’s fine for GA level. Mentioning the portrayal of its ban in Malaysia would also help push it over the edge to GA! Crystalite13 (talk) 14:56, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
Crystalite13, thanks for your detailed response! Yes, I believe the current Themes and styles section is all the resources we have regarding the film's cultural significance, namely David Chan's Deutsche Welle interview about the potential new wave of Hong Kong protest films, Pony Ma's essay on the film's impact on censorship, and Enoch Tam's essay on its deterritorialization. I actually just did another Google search for sources when I was replying earlier, specifically for the period from February to October of this year (after submitting the article for GA nomination), to see if I could find anything else to expand on. Unfortunately, I found nothing (see the search results in Chinese and English), and I think the current article reflects the maximum I can write about. Regarding your second suggestion, I have added a mention of the ban in Malaysia to the lead. Please have a look! —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 23:09, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the follow-up and for doing another round of source searches. The article now sufficiently covers the available material on the film’s cultural and historical context, and the added mention of the Malaysian ban strengthens the lead. This article will be passed, many congratulations! Crystalite13 (talk) 23:58, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Crystalite13, did you do a spot check for this review? There is a convention that you list the sources you checked regardless of if they fail or not, for several reasons. For example:
[1]: Y
[2a]: N
... IAWW (talk) 18:12, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
It is a wonderful world: I'm going to let this one go through, although I tend to suspect a proper source review was not done. I have examined the article. Anyone else who doubts the veracity of this GA are welcome to pursue GAR. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)