Talk:No One Killed Jessica

No One Killed Jessica has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 26, 2021. (Reviewed version).

Film: Indian

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

India: Cinema Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article was last assessed in April 2012.

Feminism Low‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

"Unfortunately due to the foul content of the film, it is not suitable for family viewing." Why is this line required in the article ? And even if it is required can it not be rephrased to 'this movie will most probably get an 'A'certification due to the nature of the content of the film' ? --Anirudh51 (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:No One Killed Jessica/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MSG17 (talk · contribs) 00:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will be reviewing this article over the next week (although I might have to go into next Sunday because of time constraints). Great work on the article so far. I have been working on the article for another Hindi movie, AK vs AK, so if you can, I would appreciate it if you could review that one.

Comments

Here are my initial comments, I'll have some more to make later.

Images are good, properly tagged and are relevant to the subject
No copyvio, all quotes are attributed, except for that no issues from Earwig
Daily changes are mostly based on formatting, no issues with stability
All statements are backed by sources which are mostly reliable

Overall, pretty good. I do see some awkward prose, but I will tackle that, MOS and neutrality later.
Issues:

News agencies such as Indo-Asian News Service should go in the "agency" field, not the "author" or "last" field.

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's an Indian film, shouldn't it be "Use Indian English"?

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some grammar issues: who dies after shot by her customer -> after being shot, uses this entire support from the public -> uses/utilises this public support

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit correcting some grammar mistakes and generally off wording... some were pretty simple (ex. Taran Adarsh gave the film four star. -> ...four stars., asked Gupta to censored all of the scenes. -> ...censor...), and some stuff that is a bit harder to detect, technically correct but sounds really weird to me, or changed some prose to make more sense (For example, the murderer being a politician's son is more important to the plot and readers than being her customer). Sorry, I think the article is really close to passing GA and just needs a couple more edits, and I felt that it would be easier for me to edit the article than to explain every issue. I have some more feedback on the bottom. MSG17 (talk) 03:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Koimoi is considered an unreliable source by WP:ICTF, although I will have to research the trade analyst cited. Also, if you can find a better source than the Amazon Prime listing of the film, I would appreciate that.

I think Koimoi's sources would be reliable if they were written by credible author... --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the author seems credible. No issues with that source. MSG17 (talk) 03:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent linking of authors in citations: the second instance of a citation from Komal Nahta has a link to his Wikipedia page but the first instance and other authors with an article (such as Taran Adarsh aren't)

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More feedback:

When you say the political party, is it the ruling party? The party of Manish's father? Please specify.

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are Vishal Rastogi and Lucky Singh the other two men that were with Manish at the bar? It might be good to work that in to the prose if that's the case.

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...she found little resemblance between herself and her "fighter" character. - Not supported by the ref, where she says "they are both fighters".

Wait, ummm... i don't understand. She has said, "We are both fighters", which means that she found her role Sabrina has "fighter" character. The statement also explained that her role is similar to herself. For your information, I used the article Kareena Kapoor (in the sentence "She found little resemblance between herself and her "over-the-top" character, and modeled Poo's personality on that of Johar.") as an example for this point. --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly - resemblance means similarity, so when she says that she found the role similar to herself, that's the opposite of finding "little resemblance". MSG17 (talk) 14:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed it, and it must be more better now. --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

strong competition? I don't see anything in the source that indicates that adjective is apt.

Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon says nothing about a CD version, and RT gives the streaming release as Mar 11, 2017, not March 8 (assumedly 2011).

Sorry my bad, i think i had a deja vu --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The CD seems to be for the album, not, say, a VCD version of the film. Shouldn't that go into the soundtrack section?

Oh yeah, you're right... removed --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:52, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made some more minor grammar modifications. Thanks for addressing all my issues. I think this article is ready to be promoted.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed