Talk:Shahid (film)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 05:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I will review this article. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 05:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• "the Indian Film Festival Stuttgart" at one part, and "the Indian Film Festival of Stuttgart" at another part. Be consistent. Let it be "the Indian Film Festival of Stuttgart" for all the places it is mentioned.
• "Vivek Ghamande as Faheem Khan" — Khan or Ansari?
• "Director Hansal Mehta said that he needed a break" — Mention it as "In an interview with [the person who interviewed Mehta] of [The newspaper name], director Hansal Mehta said that he needed a break".
• "and while he was defending Faheem Ansari in the 2008 Mumbai attacks case that he was killed" — remove "that" and rewrite as "and while he was defending Faheem Ansari in the 2008 Mumbai attacks case, he was killed"
• "To gather facts they interviewed his family members and friends for two months. Mehta chose not to go with them as he feared that seeing a filmmaker family and friends would "alter the version of Shahid's life they narrated"" — Rephrase it as "They interviewed his family members and friends for two months. Mehta chose not to go with them as he feared that on seeing a filmmaker, Azmi's family and friends would "alter the version" of his life." By the way, did Azmi's family and friends know that Singh and Jai were filmmakers? Just curious.

Done. Well its not actually mentioned in the reference anywhere.

• "Mehta went to seek permission to make the film; family members expressed their skepticism about the project. Later, they agreed and talked to him about Azmi." — Its contradicting your earlier statement that Mehta didn't go with Singh and Jai. Do clarify.

Mehta had sent Singh and Jai earlier for research. Later he went to talk to the family members for the permission.

• In the infobox the budget is 6.5 but in the Casting and filming section, its 86 lakh. Which is the right one?

It's actually 65 lakh, it was somehow tweaked to 6.5.

• The word "called" is mentioned a lot of times in the critical response section. Do reword at least some of them.

References

• Reformat all references by including "accessdate, archiveurl, archivedate" and authors wherever mentioned. Start with references 4 and 5 and use [1] instead of [2].
• Reference 28 should be "Koimoi". Not "koimoi". "K" should be capital.
• References 30 and 35 should be italicised.
• Do mention "Madhureeta Mukherjee" at the reference 39 citation as "|last=Mukherjee|first=Madhureeta" and include the accessdate.
• Reference 51 is "Reuters", not "Reuter". Add an "s" at the end.

That's about it from me. Address these comments, Yashthepunisher and the article will be passed.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

All of your comments have been hopefully resolved Ssven2. Thank you for the review. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:15, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

Where is the source that Karan Kulkarni is the film's composer? And would the sentence The scene where Azmi's face is blackened by assailants outside a courtroom fit under "Filming"? I think so. Also, Vivek Ghamande and Baljinder Kaur are unsourced. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:44, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Fixed. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:08, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.

   Pass or Fail:

Thank you for addressing my comments, Yashthepunisher. Congratulations, the article has passed.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 17:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)