Talk:Sairat/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Veera Narayana (talk · contribs) 19:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I shall review this nomination and am expecting the nominator to address the concerns that would arise, if any. Regards, Veera Narayana 19:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

• Manjule repeats twice in the first sentence of the lead.
• Infobox shows three production houses, but we see only two in the lead. Also, the cinematographer's full name was not written in the lead.
• "was director of photography" or "was the director of photography"?
• written and wrote in the same sentence isn't advisable.
• "Headstrong and also academically proficient, she enjoys driving a tractor or a Royal Enfield Bullet motorcycle." -- Is the bike bit that important from an encyclopaedia POV?
• "Archi's father forces the police to register a false complaint that Archi was gang-raped by Parshya and his friends." -- You have already established that Tatya is Archi's father. Why not use his name directly?
• "A woman from a nearby slum, Suman Akka (who lives with her young son, Sanket) intervenes and saves Archi and Parshya from certain tragedy." -- Are the brackets that necessary?
• "After the phone call, Archi's brother Prince and his relatives arrive with gifts from her mother in an apparent reconciliation." -- Again, it has been established earlier that Prince is Archi's brother. Why not use Prince directly?
• "The young Aakash returns with the neighbour (who leaves him at his doorstep) and sees his parents on the floor, bloody and hacked to death." -- It is already known that Aakash is young, so need not mention the same thing again. And, are the brackets necessary?

More later... Veera Narayana 09:06, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

All done. The brackets were included during the GOCE copyedit I guess. Yashthepunisher (talk) 10:06, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

• "He had begun the story of Sairat in 2009..." -- writing? working on?
• "While editing it, he remembered the story of Sairat" -- remembered might not be the right word to fit in there.
• "Manjule realised that many people did not see Fandry..." -- To the best of my knowledge, plays are seen and films are watched.
• "Tanaji Galgunde and Arbaz Shaikh played supporting roles in the film, and Manjule made a cameo appearance as a cricket commentator." -- This line belongs to the next section ideally.
• Why go for a single, long paragraph? Can't we break it into at least two for an easier read?
• Rajguru repeats almost in every line in the first paragraph of the filming section.
• "Twenty-year-old graduate student Akash Thosar was cast as Prashant Kale after he met Manjule at a railway station and showed him some of his photos. Manjule showed them to Nagraj; Thosar was summoned for auditions and eventually selected for the role of a lower-caste fisherman's son." -- Who was that guy whom Thosar met at the railway station?
• "portions were shot in Hyderabad" -- few portions? large portions? substantial portions?
• "It took nearly 70 days" -- to wrap the principal photography, right? Some can assume that the entire production process (including post-production) took 70 days to complete. Please be clear.
• Manjule said, "There are lots of locations, a huge number of characters and many complicated crowd scenes". Was it a reason Manjule cites for the delay? If it remains implicit, it would seem vague for the way the sentences flow.
• "According the director" -- to the director. And that line actually suits to be a part of the writing process i.e. the previous section.
• Sudhakar Reddy needs to be credited with his full name, as provided in the infobox.
• "On 21 December 2015, two one-minute trailers were released. The film's official poster was released on 2 April, 2016" -- this content is advised against by WP:FILMMARKETING
• "The film was also screened at the India Habitat Centre Film Festival, the Brahmaputra Valley Film Festival, the International Film Festival of India and the Indian Film Festival in The Hague." -- Just to clarify, all of these were post release?
• "In April 2016, Manjule filed a complaint with the Mumbai Police after the film was leaked online two days before its release." -- Two things. Unless otherwise postponed to another month, mentioning April 2016 is useless. Second, it is better you mention that we are talking about the theatrical release.

More later... Veera Narayana 09:00, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

All done. Yashthepunisher (talk) 11:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

• Mihir Bhanage already introduced in the soundtrack section. You need not do the same again wholly in the reception section.
• Who is Divya Unni? I mean, for which newspaper or website has she reviewed the film?
• Who is Shweta Parande? See, i get that they are writing for some newspaper or website, don't think i am being cynical. I just want to say that they have not those critics whose name is enough to cite, like a Raja Sen or Baradwaj Rangan, whose articles at Wikipedia are notable.

If that's the case, then the article will only have a handful of reviews because most critics don't have their own WP article.

I am saying that the newspaper or the source for whom these critics are reviewing the film must be mentioned.

• "Karmala, where the film was made, was visited by nearly 20,000 tourists within three weeks of its release." -- made? made is not the right word. BTW, is it necessary to link Karmala here? We have already mentioned it as a Taluk in the development section.
• "His parents approved his marriage after seeing Sairat" -- watching
• Now coming to the images, all seem fine, but i have an issue with the Solapur image. The location, Kambar Talav, was any scene filmed there? If yes, an appropriate caption would be "Kambar Talav, one of the locations in Solapur, where Sairat was shot."

The film was shot in Solapur. The image is one of the lake's situated in Solapur. I couldn't find a better image of Solapur than this one.

• Referencing seems fine.

Well, at the end of the assessment, i find Sairat worthy enough to be a GA. I expect the nominator to answer the remaining queries, following which i might take the final decision regarding the article's promotion. Yours truly, Veera Narayana 15:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for conducting the review, I have hopefully resolved them all. Yashthepunisher (talk) 16:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.

   Pass or Fail:

A note of thanks for the valuable contribution you have just made. Regards, Veera Narayana 17:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)