Talk:Soha Ali Khan

Soha Ali Khan was nominated as a Media and drama good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 29, 2023). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

India 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 was last assessed in April 2012.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Oxford Info should be added back

Why was this removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surilpatel (talk • contribs) 17:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PAGE MOVED

IT WAS NECESSAY TO MOVE THE PAGE AS IT WOULD BE EASY FOR OTHERS TO SEARCH THE ARTICLE SO ITS MY REQUEST TO YOU GUYS PUT IT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL NAME --Srkhan2 (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed an Image

Removed a wallpaper sized image taken from some unconfirmed website. Image:SohaAliKhan 1 800x600.jpg In my opinion the file should be deleted from wikipedia. 54UV1K 20:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INDIA Banner/Delhi Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Delhi workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Delhi or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 02:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Soha Ali Khan still8.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Soha Ali Khan still8.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Soha Ali Khan still8.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Soha Ali Khan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205054834/http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Bollywood/Up-close-and-personal-with-Soha-Ali-Khan/Article1-774410.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Bollywood/Up-close-and-personal-with-Soha-Ali-Khan/Article1-774410.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:00, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GIFA result removal

Amazomagisto, you removed the GIFA result of WON as a cleanup. You have again removed the GIFA result of WON with comment Remove erroneous wiki source. How is "WON" a wiki source, or removing it a cleanup task? Why are you moving the reference of the table's Ref. column into the Result column? What is your concern with the GIFA award or the result? Jay (talk) 17:11, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you were only trying to fix the table that was already distorted, I have fixed it. Jay (talk) 17:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My intention was to clean the code that was overflowing into the film/book column. Sorry, if I wasn't clear with my edit messages. Looks like its fixed now. Amazomagisto (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I notice that you have a copy of my signature now! Jay (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nomination

This article needs more improvement than just two section. Her career is not explained, no information about her personal life, media image etc. I am afraid this article might quick fail. @Twinkle1990 FYI. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 12:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Soha Ali Khan/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 18:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this. TompaDompa (talk) 18:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

At approximately 550 words of prose including the WP:LEAD (approximately 400 excluding it), this is a very short article.
Why is this article in Category:Actresses from Mumbai?
The article switches between referring to its subject as "Soha", "Khan", and "Pataudi".
This needs substantial copyediting.
I don't see a strong reason to include all three images. The one in the infobox is fine, but the two in the body add very little. They are not particularly high-quality images in terms of lighting, sharpness, composition, and so on.
The images present a MOS:SANDWICH issue.

Lead

who has worked in Hindi, Bengali and English films – I would write "English-language" (i.e. not made in England but made in English) and link English language.
younger sister of actor Saif Ali Khan – no reason to link actor, and even if there were it should have been linked at the first occurrence of "actress".
best known for – this needs a source.
She won Global Indian Film Awards, International Indian Film Academy Awards, Bengal Film Journalists' Association Awards for her performance – why the italics? For that matter, did she win multiple of each?
for her performance in the movie Rang De Basanti. – clunky. The film is named in the preceding sentence.
She was nominated for the Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actress for the same movie. – again, clunky. And again, why the italics?
she authored a book The Perils of Being Moderately Famous – grammar.
that won Crossword Book Award in 2018. – grammar. And why the italics?

Early life

This entire section is pretty much all genealogy. See WP:NOTGENEALOGY. It's also pretty difficult to follow without a family tree.
was born [...] to the Pataudi family – odd phrasing.
to the Pataudi family as the Nawab of Pataudis – what?
Hailing from the Pashtun ancestry – grammar.
Both her father Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi – already linked in the preceding sentence.
were former captains – "were former" is rather clunky.
the mutawalli of Auqaf-e-Shahi – meaning what?
The late – unencyclopedic phrasing.
The late major general of Pakistan, Sher Ali Khan Pataudi, is her great-granduncle – "the late" and "is" are contradictory.

Education

This section consists of a single sentence. It should either be expanded or incorporated elsewhere.

Personal life

She gave birth to their daughter, Inaaya Naumi Khemu on 29 September 2017. – is there a strong reason to provide the name of a non-notable minor here? WP:BLPNAME says The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject. with an explanatory note that says This is generally interpreted by the community to include the removal of names of non-notable minors from articles about their notable family members, such as when a notable individual births or sires a non-notable minor.

Career

This section is very thin. It barely goes beyond listing works. Where it does present additional information, it ends up taking up almost half the section for a single work (Soundproof).
at the premiere Of – stray capitalization.
http://www.starplus.in/pages/index.php?s=Godrej%20Khelo%20Jeeto%20Jiyo&showid=29&pid=727 is a dead link, and from what I can gather it's a link to a streaming service? That doesn't strike me as an appropriate source.

Filmography

Separate language into its own column rather than including it in the "notes" column.

Publications

This section should be at the end (i.e. immediately preceding the "See also" section), per MOS:LAYOUTWORKS.
Including the award here is inappropriate.

Awards and nominations

With such a low number of awards and nominations as this, Template:Infobox actor awards is unnecessary.
The totals do not match the table. I count four wins, not six.
https://movieetalks.com/soha-ali-khan/ looks a lot like it plagiarised this Wikipedia article. That makes it a non-reliable source per WP:CIRCULAR.

Summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
See my comments above.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
See my comments above.
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
See my comments above.

C. It contains no original research:
See my comments above.

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Earwig gives a couple of false positives where the copying was clearly done in the opposite direction. Because the article will need to be extensively rewritten before it can be promoted to WP:Good article status, I have not checked for WP:Close paraphrasing at this point.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
This is basically a genealogy and a resume, with scant information beyond that.

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
The genealogy is a clear instance of not staying focused on the topic.
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
No obvious neutrality issues, but there is so little information that it's a bit difficult to tell.
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
All media are public domain or use licenses that are acceptable per WP:CFAQ.

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
See my comments above.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
This is far from ready and qualifies for a WP:QUICKFAIL.

@Twinkle1990: I'm closing this as unsuccessful. The list of issues above is not exhaustive, but a sample of issues I noted while reading through the article. TompaDompa (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.