Talk:Magadheera/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Onel5969 (talk · contribs) 14:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- Even though it has been through the c/e process, I feel this article could do with another light pass by a different editor. Some of the writing is still awkward, e.g. the sentence about the two deaths by electrocution in the "Release" subsection "Mishaps". There are still a few other places like this throughout the article. I would go through and make the corrections, but since I'm doing the review, it should be done by a different editor. If you have trouble getting someone to do it, I'll be more than happy to finish going through the article. UPDATE - awkward sections have been corrected, now feel prose is clear and concise.
- B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- The layout is very well done, as is the table in the "Accolades" section. The organization is good, with the sections flowing in a nice order. This is a very long article, so the lead cannot reflect on every subject (imho), but it hits on all the high points.
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:
- Can't find any items which need a reference which doesn't have one. And nice job of not OVER-referencing (which can be annoying).
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Very extensive coverage, which goes over every aspect of the film. Nicely done.
- B. Focused:
- Within the individual sections, the article remains focused, with very little fluff. One issue I had is in the "plagiarism" section. None of the issues written about have the results of the disputes. But on the whole, I'm very impressed how the sections lead into one another, and the entire flow of the article.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- The 3 non-free images have valid Fair Use rationales attached to them.
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- Appropriate captions, highly relevant to the sections in which they appear. The pics that are included definitely add to the quality of the article, nicely done. Would like to see more photos, but I'm a visual sort of guy, and can understand if more are not available; this is a want, not a need.
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- By the slimmest of margins. I feel that the prose issues need to be addressed prior to GA passage. Other than that, the article is great shape. Once those issue are resolved I'll be happy to change my vote.
- Pass or Fail:
- (talk page stalker) Pavan, just one thing you can do: can you mention something about Ghora's final fate (if any) in the plot? Kailash29792 (talk) 15:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Done Ghora is accidentally killed by Raghuveer in the pre climax and the same is added in the plot. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)