Talk:Angrej/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this soon. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Yash! VedantTalk 13:26, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Lead

• Archive these links.

• On it.

• "Angrej had Ammy Virk, Binnu Dhillon,.." Till now, the article was in present tense.
• I feel you can trim the unnecessary details about some Goreyan Nu Daffa Karo in the lead.

• I think it's significant as that is the only way of putting a timeline on it.

• "Production designer Raashid Rangrez paid particular attention to the film's sets and costumes as he wanted them to best represent the Punjab of the 1940s." I feel the last bit can be rephrased.
• In the lead its 'A Rhythm Boys', but in the infobox its 'A Rhythm Boyz'.

Plot

• Remove the actors name from brackets, as it eats unnecessary space. We have the cast section for that.
• "He tells his mother of his intentions to marry Maado; she is overwhelmed by his son's indecent behaviour, but Angrej's sister-in-law agrees to arrange for the marriage." This sentence could be split in half.
• ".he is caught by Maado's father, who is furious". --> he is caught by Maado's furious father.
• Delink Lahore, per WP:OLINK and link partial paralysis.
• Is the wooden radio bit important for the plot?

• Yes, it was one of the luxurious gifts that was used to highlight the financial gap.

• Be consistent with the name, Dhann Kaur or Dhan Kaur.
• doesn't love --> doesnot love.
• Instead of continuosly writting Dhann Kaur, you can mention her as simply 'Kaur'.

Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Fixed the rest Yash. VedantTalk 16:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Production

• Simerjit Singh was later hired to direct the film; he was assisted by Amrit Raj Chadda. Who is Amrit Raj Chadda and what's the relevance to mention an assistant director here?

• Removed.

• I believe 'e' in Englishman shouldn't be in caps.

• I believe it is, it's a proper noun like any other.

• "The former said that the film's title, Angrej, which roughly translates to "Englishman" was used by the people of British Punjab to label someone whose thoughts were ahead of their times." Provide proper attribution here.

Here?

I am sorry Yash, what do you mean by attribution? From what I see everything has been properly attributed. VedantTalk 15:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

I mean the quotes should be under inverted comma's. Yashthepunisher (talk) 18:42, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• "Gill said that it was challenging task to find the right actresses to play Maado and Dhan Kaur. Aditi Sharma and debutante Sargun Mehta, who according to him suited the characters unbelievably well". Again.

Here again? Still not fixed. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• "Sharma said that she always wanted to work in a Punjabi film and was attracted to Angrej's script and it's "old world charm"." I guess.

• Yes, "its".

• "Mehta, who made her feature film debut with the film was offered the role by Amberdeep Singh."
• "..as the production team wanted to "depict life sans electric poles, mobile towers and modern-day lifestyle". What is life sans?

• it means life without electric... .

• Is the link to set construction necessary?

• I mean why not? Set construction is as significant for the project as is for any other period drama.

• Props is informal, use 'property'.
• "Costumes, which included punjabi wedding attire were made of khadi handloom fabric." Comma after wedding attire.
• The cloth was brought from cities including Banaras, Bikaner, and Jalandhar. It's pretty obvious that they are cities.

• Well, not so much for a non-Indian reader, but I've removed it anyway. They are wiki-linked for the curious lot.

Yashthepunisher (talk) 06:23, 17 March 2018 (UTC) Fixed, Yash. VedantTalk 08:42, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• The rest seems fine. Once the above raised issues are fixed. This article shall pass! Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Fixed Everything Yash, thank you for taking up the review. I appreciate all the help with the article. Also, do watch the film any chance you get! VedantTalk 11:00, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: