Talk:Om Shanti Om/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Smarojit (talk · contribs) 05:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I shall review this article. Will begin once I have read the article thoroughly. Smarojit (talk) 05:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review

I see you have not contributed much to the article. So I wonder why you have nominated it for GA! I think that the article is far from ready to become a GA. Here are some of the reasons why:

Prose

The article needs a thorough copy edit. I can see a huge number of grammatical mistakes. I can't even begin to list all of them.

The lead does not summarize the contents of the article.

The plot is much more than 700 words.

The production section is under-developed.

WP:OVERLINKING in almost all the sections.
Why is there a separate section for home media? It has only one paragraph.

References

This is probably the main issue with this article.

Most of the references are not formatted properly.
Ref #15, #27 are dead.
A majority of the references are not from reliable sources. For example: GoBollywood and Humsurfer.com are not reliable at all. And these are just two names.
There are mismatches in the use of "cite news" and "cite web" templates.
Most of the references are incomplete. Some bare URL's have also been used!

The above points are not even a comprehensive list; they are the first things that struck me. There are several more issues. The article doesn't look good to me. Does the nominator have anything to add? I will have to quick fail this article otherwise. Smarojit (talk) 05:56, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support quick fail. Instead the nominator can try hands at the peer review for improvement in the quality. The main reasons behind my comment is the the article is not reliably sourced. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 18:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fail

I am failing this article. It needs a lot of work to be done. Smarojit (talk) 06:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]