Talk:Huma Qureshi/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 15:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll review this is a bit later on.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  15:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Intro This strikes me as not neutral. "Critically acclaimed" is repeated too much. "She is considered one of the most promising actresses in Hindi cinema." according to whom?
 * ✅ - tweaked


 * Early "Qureshi has worked with several NGOs and assisted a documentary filmmaker". What NGOs and films were these?
 * Well, only that much information is available. Prashant  talk  02:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Paragraph break after theatre productions please.

Acting career Could do with a better balance of quotes, a lot by her and Taran Adarsh but there are some others so should be OK.
 * her performance earned an honorable mention at the 2012 Indian Film Festival of Los Angeles. What is "an honorable mention"? Award, special award what?
 * ✅ - I think, Special mention was used but, was changed during copy/edit by GOCE. Prashant  talk  02:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * generally positive reviews from critics; Qureshi's performance (particularly her scenes with Siddiqui)[9]attracted positive feedback from reviewers. Unnecessary repetition, you only need to say positive feedback once.


 * "broad critical acclaim". Seems a bit much. I'd like to see some evidence of that and some more negative quotes in the article to balance it out.
 * ✅ - Added new sources for the "wide critical acclaim" and a negative quote for her performance in th film. Prashant  talk  02:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Image


 * "Qureshi described Gangs of Wasseypur as a "life-changing film"." Shouldn't this be in the career section with the film?
 * ✅ - Added to "Acting career" section. Prashant  talk  02:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * "She is known for her unconventional appearance." What exactly is an unconventional appearance? Does she have five heads? She looks pretty normal for an actress to me and looks pretty slim too. Sources??
 * ✅ - The source was present but was linked to the following quote. I have tweaked it for now. Prashant  talk  03:12, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

References Inconsistency in linking publisher names. Either link all or don't.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  17:42, 9 April 2013 (UTC) ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  17:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I have linked all the publisher names to maintain consistency. Prashant  talk  02:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Conditional though. She's barely appeared in any films so this article will need to be continuously updated. If she has any negative reviews I'd like to see them added to balance it out a bit more. Give where she is in her career and coverage, I think the article is adequate at the moment and covers what needs to be covered.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  07:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)