Talk:Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham.../GA1

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

Reviewer: Ankitbhatt (talk · contribs) 05:45, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Since this is an urgent request, here goes :-


 * "2001 Indian family melodrama film" Family melodrama film? That's rather unencyclopedic. It would be better described as a romantic drama.
 * Changed it, but don't you think that "romantic drama" doesn't exactly describe the genre of the film? It's a melodrama. What do you think? Smarojit (talk) 07:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Definitely Melodrama not Romance as the main topic. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  23:17, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Music was scored by" Firstly, missing "the". Secondly, the music credits are coming a bit too soon. They should come after the Cast bits. ✅


 * Writing the Cast's characters names in the lead is not necessary. A simple listing out would do. Please rephrase that and the next line about the story. ✅


 * After mentioning any film, you should write the release year, e.g. Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1997). ✅


 * Write the year for the release date (14 December 2001). ✅


 * "Written specifically to evoke nostalgia among the expatriate Indian audiences" This bit would be better clubbed with the credits of the scriptwriter in the lead. ✅


 * "the film was criticized by certain academicians for the portrayal of British society as morally corrupt, while conveying an idealist image of India." This bit should come after the reviews bit. ✅


 * "The film debuted at the third position at the British box office and was a success at the American box office as well." Too specific, not needed in the lead. ✅


 * "Rahul, however rebels and marries Anjali." Missing comma after however. ✅


 * "Rahul, however rebels and marries Anjali. Horrified, Yash disowns Rahul as his son. Disheartened, Rahul leaves the house with his wife. Nandini sends Sayeeda (Farida Jalal), Rahul and Rohan's nanny, after Rahul to take care of him. Rahul eventually moves to London. Meanwhile, Rohan is sent to a boarding school, as per family tradition." Rather choppy, too many small sentences. Increase the flow and make a few combinations. ✅


 * "but the latter," Extra comma. ✅


 * "the most obvious choice" Firstly, no need of "most". Second, "obvious" is an opinion, it should be within double quotes. ✅


 * "Kajol, however was moved to tears during the script narration" Missing comma. ✅


 * "watching a rough-cut" Why is there a hyphen in rough cut? ✅


 * "he wanted their presence in this film too" Their? It should be "her". ✅


 * "an accidental slip by Sony Music in the promos, led to her discovery." Firstly, extra comma. Second, avoid "promos", use "promotions" or "promotional activities". ✅

Otherwise, nice Cast section :).


 * Why is the Themes and Analysis section present so early in the article? Please change the ordering.
 * Where do you want me to put it? Several articles have this section right after the plot. Smarojit (talk) 07:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Since it deals more with reviews that happened after the film was released, I suspect it should be after the release section, almost at the end of the article. Maybe even remove 'Themes' from the title and call it 'Critical analysis'. It was originally meant to be themes used in story development, but it didn't turn out that way. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  23:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Why "Critical Analysis"? Most of the people talking about the film are not film critics. Smarojit (talk) 04:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Call it whatever you think is appropriate, but I think the placement is better now. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  12:44, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, the current placement is excellent. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:54, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

As of now, that's it. Will be back for more. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 06:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "in which the entire family participate." It should be "participates".


 * "Khan describes the character of Rahul" Tense.


 * As stated before, write a film's release year if you mention it. Example, Kaho Naa... Pyaar Hai (2000). Again for Kuch Kuch Hota Hai in the Rani Mukherji bit.


 * "Kapoor described Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham... to be primarily Kajol's film" "Described" is the wrong verb to use here. Either re-phrase the entire sentence or change the verb to a more suitable one.


 * "The idea about the film, then, revolved around two daughters-in-law." Unnecessary "then".


 * "Sharmishta Roy recreated Chandni Chowk in the Film City studio of Mumbai." Film City has a number of studios, so saying "the studio" in Film City is incorrect. Change it to "a".


 * "as she suffered from a bad fall." Two "suffered"s in quick succession. I suggest changing one of them to something else.


 * "Lyrics were provided by Sameer," Do not start a line with "Lyrics..." Always use "The lyrics..."


 * Wikilink lakh.


 * "while being critical of the song "Say Shava Shava", " Unnecessary comma at the end.


 * Italicize K3G.


 * "featuring remixes by the Indian electronic music producer," Firstly, its "producers". Second, unnecessary comma at the end.


 * "several theaters increased their ticket rates." "Rates" would be better substituted by "prices".


 * "The use of the "Jana Gana Mana"" First, missing "the". Second, shouldn't this bit be in the Soundtrack section?
 * The issue was with the way the song was used in the film, not with the song itself, so no. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  18:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Critical reaction" sounds grammatically incorrect, especially as a section header. Why not use the universally-endorsed "Critical reception"?


 * "and nitpicked on script strengths and inconsistencies." Nitpicked is a subjective opinion, please re-phrase.


 * "Taran Adarsh of Bollywood Hungama gave the film 4.5 of 5 stars." Missing "out".


 * Why do you have to note the names of the people in charge of the costumes/choreography etc. in a review? Please remove this; its better suited for the Filming section.


 * The Taran Adarsh review bit is too long. Make cuts please.


 * "there were may ignored or illogical plot points" "may"? I think you meant "many".


 * "Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham... smashed all opening records." I'm frightened. It smashed? Oh my! Please use a less enthralling and exciting word; "broke" would do just as well.


 * "on its first weekend in India" In its first weekend.


 * "never before had opening records been eclipsed by such large margins." Source?
 * Its the same BOI source, 55. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  18:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "but ultimately won only five awards." Non-neutral tone. Phrase it as "and ultimately won five awards". "Only" is very subjective; how much is five awards is different for different people.


 * "and a few at the Zee Cine Awards" No need of "a few". Keep the tone objective.


 * Darśana should be pipe linked to darshan, like this:- darshan.

More in a few minutes. tomorrow. Need sleep now :P. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC) ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 18:56, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * All done ✅. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  18:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully final set of comments regarding prose :-


 * "who has shifted from India to London, to pursue his studies" Unnecessary comma. ✅


 * "Bachchan, on his part agreed to do the film" Missing comma after "part". ✅


 * "Aryan Khan (Shahrukh Khan's real-life son) as the younger Rahul (special appearance)" Shouldn't this be placed along with all the other younger credits? ✅


 * First there is "Karan and the various costume designers" And later we have "costume designers Manish Malhotra, Shabina Khan and Rocky S." Why don't you merge these two? ✅


 * "the production designers led by Sharmishta Roy" Roy part is unnecessary since its already mentioned. ✅


 * "Rakesh Budhu of Planet Bollywood gave the film 8 of 10 stars," Missing "out". Same with "Shamaila Khan of BBC gave the film 9 of 10 stars" ✅


 * "in 2003 the film was the first Indian film to be given" Two films in such quick succession is sounding a bit odd. You could re-phrase it "in 2003, the film became the first from India to be given..." ✅


 * "Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham... made a lifetime gross of 117.29 crore (US$23.4 million)." Mention that this is a worldwide gross. ✅


 * "as he felt that Lagaan was "a classic" and deserved to win." Why is Lagaan not wikilinked? ✅


 * "The film, however, won several awards at the International Indian Film Academy Awards (IIFA)," No need of "however". ✅


 * "the film was aimed to invoke nostalgia" Grammatically incorrect. It should be "the film was aimed at invoking nostalgia". ✅


 * "on VHS and DVD (one and two disc version) formats, beginning 2002," Missing "in". Same for "and in the Blu-ray format beginning 2010." ✅


 * References


 * Ref18. Indiafm? Is there no other source for the review?
 * It's Bollywood Hungama. Changed it. Smarojit (talk) 10:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref20. Where is the video? Same for Ref24.
 * It's part of the DVD. There can't be a link for that. Smarojit (talk) 10:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref 25, first-party source. ✅


 * Ref 45. No link. Is it a book? ✅


 * Ref65, first-party source. ✅


 * Ref66, 67, 86. Reliability?

Otherwise done. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:19, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Final quibbles:-


 * "The music was scored by" (lead) Generally, "scored" refers to background score, not to the songs. I would suggest "composed".✅


 * "soon after the release of Karan's debut film, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998)" Unnecessary comma.✅


 * "Western ideology, is however equated with economic success" The comma should be after "is". Plus an extra comma needed after "however".✅


 * "Rohan was the only character in the film who could navigate multiple cultural spaces with ease." Missing "in" after "navigate".
 * That's how it is in the source; 'in' is not needed. see examples BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  16:29, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll let this go. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Otherwise I shall pass this whenever done. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:10, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Final review


 * Well-written
 * The article contains very good prose, properly placed in well-named sections which follow the MOS. The prose is clear and does not deviate, and any grammar mistakes have been pointed out and rectified.


 * Factually accurate and verifiable
 * All the information in the article is sourced properly, to reliable sources which are cited at the right times. The article, as of now, lacks any form of original research.


 * Broad in its coverage
 * The main aspects of the topic are addressed properly and in good detail, without unnecessary deviations or expanding on trivia.


 * Neutral
 * The article shows a neutral point of view with respect to the subject.


 * Stable
 * Except the necessary GA problems, the article displays stability and no edit wars or other controversial/battleground mentality.


 * Illustrated
 * The article lacks slightly in the illustration department, but the two photos present are well-captioned and properly placed, in addition to being helpful. For further levels, this bit needs some improvement.

Overall, since the article passes the good article criteria, I pass this. This is one of my faster GA reviews by the way, so an extra thumbs up :). Congratulations! ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:25, 22 June 2012 (UTC)