Talk:Missamma/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 15:27, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pavanjandhyala, I will engage in a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- West Virginian (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I too, would love to thank you for taking up this! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 16:36, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pavanjandhyala and Gareth Griffith-Jones, I've finally completed a thorough and comprehensive review of this article, and I assess that it does indeed meet the criteria for Good Article status. Prior to its passage, however, I do have a few suggestions and comments that should be addressed. Thank you for all your research and hard work on this article! -- West Virginian (talk) 19:55, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lede

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the film, establishes the film's necessary context, and explains why the film is otherwise notable.
The info box is beautifully formatted and its content is sourced within the prose of the text and by the referenced cited therein.
The image of the movie poster in the info box has the necessary templates attached declaring that it is "Non-free media data" and gives the "Non-free media rationale for Missamma."
The lede is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Plot

Zamindar should be wiki-linked in its first mention within the prose section (outside the lede). Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the doctor's practice of Ayurvedic medicine negative affect the school's performance? Is he practicing rather than teaching? Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would it help to add "Meanwhile" before "Mary and M. T. Rao" so that we know this part of the plot is occurring at the same time as Gopalam decides to hire a married couple to teach at this school? Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would reword as "They treat the couple as if they are their own children." Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is Rao making up the far-fetched explanation that Mary is possessed by the soul of a Christian woman who is named after the mother of Jesus? If so, it should be reworded this way so that we know the possessing soul is named Mary. Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It may be necessary to remind the reader that Raju is the amateur detective who was teaching at Gopalam's school since this mentioned further above. Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest wiki-linking Madras to Chennai for our non-Indian readers and those readers unfamiliar that Madras is now Chennai. Done — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This section is otherwise well-written and I have no other comments or questions for this section. No sources are necessary per WP:FILMPLOT.

Cast

While formatted properly, are there any inline citations for this section?

Not available as of now, sadly. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should the first line read "Savitri as Mary/Mahalakshmi; since she is named both in the film?

Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This section is otherwise well-written, but are there any inline citations for this section?

Production

Westrex should be wiki-linked to Western Electric.

Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would it make more sense to render M. S. Chalapathi Rao and Jagannadham as "executive producers" rather than "production executives"?

Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The working still of Missamma (1955) showing actress Bhanumati's inclusion in the film can be used because it has attached "Non-free media information and use rationale" and "Non-free film-related media rationale" templates. In addition, the image has the necessary "This image is a screenshot from a copyrighted film" template attached.
Perhaps this is an American vs. Commonwealth English issue, but the hyphen in "In-between" is not necessary.

Removed the hyphen. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

Themes

The image of Charlie Chaplin has been released into the public domain and is therefore suitable for use here.
I suggest using until rather than till.
Perhaps render the beginning of the first sentence of the second paragraph as "Chakrapani disagreed that his films carried social messages..."
Empty should probably be rendered as "Empty" with quotation marks.
This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

Done All the concerns regarding this section are met. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Music

The Missamma soundtrack template is beautifully formatted and the soundtrack image is suitable for use here because it has a "Non-free media data" template attached, a "Non-free media rationale" template attached, and "This image is of a cover of an audio recording" template attached.
The contents of the template are cited within the section's prose, and its sources are verifiable.
Is there an inline citation for the last sentence of the first paragraph?

No. It is a film still and having watched the film, i noted the same. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Raga should be wiki-linked in its first usage in the prose.

Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an inline citation for "All lyrics written by Pingali Nagendrarao, except where noted." and for the information in the two tables? The "media notes" in the soundtrack albums would suffice for inline citations to to both.

Actually reference number 3 is being used. I did not want a repetition of the same in the tracklist for avoiding overlinking. I did not understand the concept of media notes. Can you please let me know? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pavanjandhyala, Citation 3 should then be placed after the titles "Tracklist of the Telugu version" and "Tracklist of the Tamil version". That would suffice as an inline citation for both tables. Once both tables are sourced by these two inline citations, we're good to go for passage! -- West Virginian (talk) 08:11, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

Release and reception

Telugu doesn't need to be wiki-linked here.

Done Delinked. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

Remakes and adaptation

The first usage of Hindi should be wiki-linked in the prose.

Done Linked. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

Dropped plans of digitisation and colorization

I wonder if "cancelled" or "discarded" would work better in the section's title rather than "dropped" as it seems un-encyclopaedic to me.

Done Rephrased as "cancelled". Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

Legacy and influence

Should both of the film's language names in Tamil and Telugu be mentioned at the start of the first sentence?
Egmore Maternity hospital should have a capitalized "Hospital."
Wiki-link Brahmin.
This section is otherwise well-written, properly sourced with verifiable references and inline citations, and I have no other suggestions or comments regarding this section.

All the three concerns were met by one of my friends Ssven2 in my absence. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pavanjandhyala, I would like to thank you, Ssven2, and Gareth Griffith-Jones for all your hard work on this article, and for addressing my above-mentioned concerns, comments, and suggestions. It is hereby a privilege for me to pass this article to good article status! Thank you all and, again, congratulations on a job well done! -- West Virginian (talk) 21:58, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]