Talk:Deepika Padukone/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 10:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Lead

Successful is repeated quite a few rimes, perhaps reword one or too, especially "hugely successful ".

Early life

By 2006 Padukone had established a successful career as a model with a hugely popular print campaign. Hugely again I don't like seeing, maybe "by 2006 Padukone had established a career as a model after a highly successful print campaign?

Acting career

• "The film was hugely publicised" -again..
• "Om Shanti Om was a hugely popular release," ditto
• "Love Aaj Kal proved the -" proved to be the
• "Padukone started 2011 with the hugely hyped item " ditto. = overly hyped
• "The pairing of Padukone with Kapoor (her ex-boyfriend) led to a huge hype surrounding the film's release" -ditto
• Padukone's next film role was opposite Shahrukh Khan in Rohit Shetty's action comedy film Chennai Express as Meenalochini Azhagu Sundaram, -when was this?

Personal

• "She visited the Indian jawan troops in Jammu, for an Independence Day special episode of NDTV's reality show Jai Jawaan.[108] In 2010 she took part in the opening ceremony of the third season of the Indian Premier League at the DY Patil Stadium in Navi Mumbai.[109] Three years later, she performed alongside Shahrukh Khan, Katrina Kaif, and Pitbull for the sixth edition of the Indian Premier League.[110] In early 2013 she performed at the 2013 Zee Cine awards[111] and later that year performed in Macao for the 14th IIFA Awards.[11" A lot of repetition of "she", replace some with Padukone.

Media

• "In 2012 it was reported that Padukone had signed on for an endorsement deal worth INR60 million (US$950,000), " -who was this deal with?

Thanks Dr. Blofeld. All the points have been addressed. :) --smarojit ^HD 10:09, 7 September 2013 (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:

Good job.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. :) --smarojit ^HD 18:35, 7 September 2013 (UTC)