Talk:Guru Sishyan (1988 film)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Veera Narayana (talk · contribs) 16:13, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
I will be reviewing this nomination, please be available. Thank you. Veera Narayana 16:13, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- Guru Sishyan actually translates to "Master and Disciple". But if any source actually says "Teacher and Student" then i am fine with it.
- Done went with "Master and Disciple". Because the actual Tamil word for teacher is Vaathiyar. --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- Too many names in the lead about supporting roles. Almost makes it good to call an ensemble cast.
- Removed two names as they were barely cameos. Now better? --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- Is Geetha a police inspector?
- Yes, written. --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- "Raja realises he is Kandhasamy's first son who went missing years ago" – How?
- During a school picnic. Watch around 1:43:38 and tell me if I missed something. --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- main hero, other hero... No. Two leads, and that's how it should be.
- "This was the first film in which the two actors, who were leading stars of Tamil cinema, were seen together onscreen" – The leading stars claim is a bit unencyclopaedic. Can't we simply say that it was their first onscreen appearance together?
- Some refs with Tamil sources need translated titles. For example, ref no. 49.
Concluding here. I really think two different people worked in this article. Like two disoriented halves of a film, each having their own narrative. Still, minor reworks could do. Let me know once the comments are addressed Kailash. Regards, Veera Narayana 09:14, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- If you have issues with the plot, either watch the Telugu-dubbed version or the English subtitled version. --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- No, don't ask the reviewers to do that. Remember Fowler? It gives bad impression about your writing skills. Veera Narayana 04:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- 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:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Its a pass. Congratulations. Having said that, the article would be benefited with some copy-editing in the future for a more tight prose. Still, good enough for a GA. Veera Narayana 04:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)