# Talk:Crawl (2019 film)

Sometimes Wikipedia editors make claims that aren't in this sources (like taking the box office and the bad reviews and claiming one was "despite" the other). So I understand caution when editors make claims about unrelated events being "conversely" or "despite" something. 
However in this case the film was not screened for critics AND the critics expressed surprise that it was quite good and wondered why it wasn't screened for critics, and the lead actress also expressed her own surprise as to why it wasn't screened for critics. -- 109.78.219.163 (talk) 20:02, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

The Box Office section notes that the film was not screened for critics. This doesn't seem like the best place for information about critics and their responses but it's better than not including it at all. -- 109.76.158.242 (talk) 00:42, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Crawl (upcoming film). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Tarantino said it might be his favorite film of the year[1] but the year isn't over yet, so maybe I'll add this to the article later with more sources if Tarantino mentions it again. -- 109.78.237.56 (talk) 17:43, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crawl (2019 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 18:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Some Dude from North Carolina, I'll be taking up the review for this nomination and will present it to you shortly. I hope you will find my feedback to be useful. Tayi Arajakate Talk 18:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Some Dude From North Carolina, I have completed the review and it seems to meet the good article criteria on nomination. Good work, I could not locate any issues with it except the one I have mentioned in the comments below. I'm not too concerned about it so I'll promote it to a good article but please do consider it. Tayi Arajakate Talk 14:20, 13 July 2021 (UTC)


#### Comments
Earwig's copyvio detector brings up a fairly high percentage. Most of this is due to quotes and some false positives. In particular, this seems to be because of a Pepper's quote in the casting section, which I would suggest trimming down a bit and instead summarising what he says. There are some copied phrases as well which I would recommend rephrasing; e.g "months of endurance training", "open his eyes underwater for long periods of time".


#### Assessment
Comprehension: The article is well written. Pass

Verifiability: The article is verifiable and well researched. Pass

Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive. Pass

Neutrality: The article is neutral. Pass

Stability: The article is stable. Pass

Illustration: The article is well illustrated. Pass