Talk:AK vs AK

DYK nom

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 22:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Anil Kapoor called AK vs AK "the fastest film I have done in my career"? Sources:The Telegraph India
  • ALT1:... that Anil Kapoor and Anurag Kashyap fought a "Twitter war" to promote AK vs AK? Source: The Free Press Journal
  • ALT2:... that the Indian Air Force asked for certain scenes to be withdrawn from AK vs AK? Source: The Indian Express

• Comment: Second DYK nom, after I withdrew the first one due to medical sourcing issues. Thanks in advance!

5x expanded by MSG17 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @MSG17: Great work. With regards to sourcing, I think it is fine per MOS:FILMPLOT, which is generally not as rigorous as a medical page would require. So this is good to go. Epicgenius (talk) 23:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

• @Epicgenius: Thanks! I assume we're rolling with the first hook, right? MSG17 (talk) 01:31, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• @MSG17: No problem. All of the hooks are fine, but I would prefer ALT0 or ALT1. Epicgenius (talk) 01:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• I agree. Between them, it's hard to decide what would be more interesting. I was considering flipping a coin, but I am more partial to ALT1 because it mentions both "AK"s in the film. MSG17 (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 22:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?}

Thanks for stepping up! I hope I haven't caused any grief or bad blood, so to speak, because of our previous interaction. MSG17 (talk) 23:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• A reference is needed to verify that the film is 108 minutes.
  • Done and fixed the runtime

You can't cite Netflix. You need a reliable source.

Rechecked the sources in the article... found one that mentioned the runtime (now stated at the old amount, strange), changed to that

• In the first paragraph, add a comma after Sonam Kapoor Ahuja.
  • Done
• Link film-within-a-film.
  • Done
• The claim that "Filming took place in December that year" seems misleading considering the note in #Production. I would reword it.
  • Reworded

Plot and cast

• Since it's just trivial, remove the note after "documentary" in the first sentence.
  • Yeah, I don't think its ideal either. Done
• Currently, the plot section is 754 words. Per WP:FILMPLOT, try to get it down to 700.
  • Managed to get it down to exactly 700
• Remove the comma after "uninterested".'
  • Done
• Remove the comma after "CCTV footage".
  • Done

• The sentence "then would take a gun out from his bag and force Kapoor to kill either of themselves" is kinda confusing. Try rewording it.
  • Reworded
• Add the cast listing template to #Cast.
  • Never knew about this template... done

Production

• Are three references really needed after "his spokesperson"?
  • Eliminated one frivolous reference, now it's just the initial report and a later refutation
• Is the quote after "early 2020, with Kapoor stating" necessary? Can it be changed to prose?
  • I would think that, for something like this, it would be best to hear it from the horse's mouth. (It helps that this quote was featured on DYK, so I am rather partial to keeping it.)

Thanks for the reason. Sounds good.

• "under-the-radar" → "under the radar"
  • Done
• Link Twitter.
  • Done
• In the note after "IAF officer", change "To be more specific" to "In the film".
  • Done

Soundtrack

• "Weiting" → "Writing"
  • Done
• NDTV and Bollywood Hungama should not be in italics.
  • Done

Reception and analysis

• Link Bollywood Hungama.
  • Its linked in the soundtrack section, so its not relinked to avoid repetition (same thing done with NDTV now).
• NDTV and Bollywood Hungama should not be in italics.
  • Done
• Move the first reference after "messaging" to after "Indian cinema',"
  • Done
• "..." → "[...]"
  • Done
• Can "inside information on" be changed to just "inside information" or is it supposed to be part of the rest of the sentence it's in?
  • Its supposed to be part of the rest of the sentence (inside information on the main actors and Bollywood in general).

So can "information on and the reputations" be changed to "information on the reputations"?

I don't see why not. Done

• Link the first use of Film Companion, not the second.
  • According to MOS:DUPLINK, "Citations stand alone in their usage, so there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article".

The first paragraph in this section has two uses of Film Companion. I was just saying to link the first one rather than the second one.

Oh...; sorry, I misread that. Fixed

• "intentionally[...]the" → "intentionally [...] the"
  • Fixed
• "intentionally[...]" → "intentionally [...]"
  • Done

References

• Archive all archivable sources (I recommend using this).
  • I already ran through it with the bot beforehand... looks like it missed a few (and I added one), so I reran it. I'll manually added an archive for one that it missed later, as it is taking a while to generate in the Internet Archive.
• Try linking each website used in each reference.
  • Done
• In the only reference citing it (currently #10), link Khaleej Times.
• Change the multiple links to Free Press Journal to The Free Press Journal.
• "Mashable India" → "Mashable India" ([[Mashable|Mashable India]])
• "Bollywood Hungama]." → "Bollywood Hungama"
  • All done

Overview

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·