Crowe's article's well written, comprehensive, has a concise lead section, proper headings, and images where appropriate. RomeoVoid 18:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It definitely needs a lot more sources and a lot more details. I.e. one sentence on Elizabethtown - there was a lot written at the time about the film's reception by critics, etc. Same thing for Vanilla Sky or any other film that just has one sentence or so on it. Mad Jack 18:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You should be able to get a GA (Good Article) status, though :) Mad Jack 18:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object images need fair use rationales Jarandawat's sup 21:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose images need fair use rationales, articles needs refereces, those references need to be inline, there needs to be some piece of criticism that is mentioned, and the lead really needs a NPOV overlook ("Crowe has made his mark with character-driven, personal films that have been generally hailed as refreshingly original and void of cynicism.") Staxringoldtalkcontribs 21:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Any article that reaches FA status is going to need a lot more than 8 sources. --PresN 03:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
