Talk:Dasavathaaram/GA2

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Which Meena is referred to in the casting section, there appear to be two actors of that name.
 * There is some broken formatting in the Soundtrack section.
 * The prose is very poor and nowhere near GA standard. It needs thorough copy-editing for grammar, spelling, style, clarity and readability.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Behindwoods, apunkachoice, www.extramirchi.com are not RS
 * There are at least six tagged dead links
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The plot section is too long. Consult the guidelines at WT:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * I have nominated File:Posterdasavatharam.jpg at WP:Possibly unfree files/2010 April 4 as derivative of a copyrighted work.
 * I query the non-free use rationale for File:Dasavatharam sherwat.jpg. How exactly does this image help readers understand the plot section?
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, a lot of issues to address. The prose, the dead links, the over long plot section, dubious sourcing, the images. On hold for seven days. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No edits have been made since my review, so I will not be listing this article at this time. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, a lot of issues to address. The prose, the dead links, the over long plot section, dubious sourcing, the images. On hold for seven days. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No edits have been made since my review, so I will not be listing this article at this time. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)