Talk:Rang (1993 film)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk · contribs) 06:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Let's see

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article suffers from grammar and prose issues. Just to name a few:

Lede

• produced by Mansoor Ahmed Siddiqui under the ANAS Films banner and directed by Talat Jani. Only notable names (i.e. those with Wikipedia articles) are identified in the lede (MOS:FILMLEDE)
• Why are there words or names italicized words when they shouldn't be?
• The film revolves around two girls—Pooja (Jhulka) and Kajal (Bharti), who, unaware of their real identities, fall in love with the same boy Yogi (Sadanah). Don't you mean "unaware of each other's identities"?
• But, upon learning about their connection, one of them decides to sacrifice for the other, while also trying to reunite their family. Sentence is confusing. For one, whose connection, the women's?

Plot

• As per MOS:FILMPLOT, plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words; this current plot has 1295 words. Pointing out the grammar issues thereto would be utterly useless. Please leave out unnecessary details that don't serve the reader's understanding of the movie.

Production

• Again, why are there several names italicized when they shouldn't be?
• died midway while shooting for it "died halfway through the shoot"
• the film was released three months after her death, posthumously. tautological; to release something posthumously is to release it after one's death
• Initially, Talat Jani had tried to rope in his sister-in-law Rubaina for the female lead unencyclopedic word choice
• Later, after Bharti's death, she appeared in some scenes as the body double. "A body double stood in for Bharti in scenes that she left unfilmed."
• Finally, Bharti was signed in place of Kapoor and since the latter was not anymore a part of the film, Jhulka agreed to retain her role. "Finally" is editorial word choice

Release and reception

• Besides India, the film took a bumper opening in the United States and Canada, mainly because it was promoted as being Divya Bharti's last film; people gathered into the theaters to get a last glimpse of her. unencyclopedic phrase

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Can't say for sure how reliable the sources cited

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Major pieces of information are missing from the article. Firstly, production section mostly talks about casting, there is no information beyond that. Casting is only one step in the stages of filmmaking. There is no information on how the film came to be through concept, writing, editing, music composition, etc. Secondly, Critical reviews for the film were mixed to positive is unreferenced and substantiated by a single review that only cites the positive reaction. Bottomline, expansion is needed for the Release and reception to give appropriate weight to both positive and negative reactions.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Due to issues raised as a result of my review of criteria 1 and 3, safe to say this article automatically fails this criterion

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Unfortunately, this GAN merits a quick fail. Article badly needs a copy edit and major expansion with citations to reliable sources. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 06:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)