Talk:Kahaani/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ankitbhatt (talk · contribs) 14:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I've already expressed interest in reviewing this article, and it gives me great pleasure in undertaking this review. As a whole, the article is pretty good but there are a few points (primarily grammar based):-


 * "based on the initial idea of Ghosh" It should be from Ghosh. ✅


 * "The film was noted for deft portrayal of Kolkata" An "a" is missing. ✅


 * "the screenplay, the cinematography and the performances of Balan, Chatterjee and Siddiqui" It would be better if you collapse the Balan-Chatterjee-Siddiqui bit into simply "the performances of the lead actors". ✅


 * "After starring in Ishqiya (2010), No One Killed Jessica (2011) and The Dirty Picture (2011), the film was Balan's fourth woman centric film[3] to win her widespread praise and coverage for her non-conventional approach in portraying strong female-oriented roles.[4][5][6]" This sentence is not suited for the lead. Please move it into the main body. ✅


 * "Word of mouth publicity and good critical response paved the way for Kahaani emerging as a major commercial success at the box office" It should be "for Kahaani to emerge as ..." ✅


 * I have a feeling that the plot length exceeds the limit of 700 words. Perhaps another editor more well-versed with the tools will be able to help. ✅
 * Doesn't looks too long. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 19:04, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The MOS says this "Plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words. The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction's non-linear storyline, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range." Kahaani being a suspense thriller consists a lot of important hierarchical events (one event leading to another) to be mentioned in the Plot and without which the reading wouldn't be clear. And believe me, I read the Plot again to shorten it but couldn't do so. IMO, the plot is just perfect without too many details.--Msrag (talk) 05:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Me too. I have read the Plot about 10 times but couldn't shorten it because it has very important details.--Plea$ant 1623 05:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The plot exceeds 850 words. I don't know if this will be applicable for the film, but I had faced a similar problem before in Dasavathaaram, which consists of 10 different stories woven together. My attempts to reduce it and keep the central theme haven't been completely successful, at that. Secret of success (talk)  07:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Tried my level best, but couldn't even remove one word from it. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 07:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 840 words now. Cannot be nothing less than that.--Msrag (talk) 08:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that 840 words is exceeding the limit too much. The film's plot is certainly not non-linear enough or complicated enough to warrant such an extensive plot. The trick is to word the plot in such a way that details are preserved but not written in an elaborate manner. if you could do so, it would be best. A slight relaxation to 750 words due to the thrill factor can be done, but not more than that, I'm afraid. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 11:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ankit, you know how much I tried my level best to shorten plot for Ra.One, which was trim-able. However, shortening the plot of Kahaani is damn complicated. The film depends on each and every minute. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 12:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok. I think we can leave that for now and I'll try to find some solution to it. But can we proceed further onto other sections? That shouldn't be stopping us, right? --Msrag (talk) 12:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Its unfortunate that you had trimmed it (Ra.One) so much Karthik; you trimmed it to the level where the plot now sounds like a piece of idiot-speak, making the plot look even more foolish than it already was (and that's no mean feat :P). The FACs had pointed out some glaring problems in the plot, which I had to fix rapidly. As I stated, I am not asking you to cut details. I am asking you to re-word the sentences in such a way that the details are preserved, but not written in so many words. The balance is crucial. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 06:08, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Its 740 words now. Can we proceed now and close this? --Msrag (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Further reduced to 679. Thanks to Dwaipayanc. No issues at all.--Msrag (talk) 05:43, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Advaita Kala with a nascent idea for the film" It should be "of the film" ✅ -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 08:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There are some tense problems. For example, "which has been reflected in the film" should be "which was reflected in the film" ✅


 * "wrapped it up by February 2010," Please use a more formal word. ✅


 * "She stated, "It was challenging to write the script as I had to do a lot of research on the subject. I went back to Kolkata, refreshed elements, went back to my own experiences to get the real picture of the city which is shown in the movie."" This bit is sounding like a repetition. Please look into it.
 * This sentence, "Kala developed the story as part of a memoir on the city of Kolkata, where she had followed the footsteps of her boyfriend in 1999, quite akin to the protagonist in the film." talks about how the initial idea of the story was developed. After that this sentence, "Kala started writing the story in 2009 and finished it up by February 2010, the effort culminating in a 185-page script." talks about the her actual story writing experience and thus the quote, "It was challenging to write the script as I had to do a lot of research on the subject. I went back to Kolkata, refreshed elements, went back to my own experiences to get the real picture of the city which is shown in the movie." supports that same story writing experience. Whats the confusion here and where is it repeating?--Msrag (talk) 12:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Open Secrets:India's Intelligence Unveiled" Missing space. ✅


 * "Kala, whose maiden novel Almost Single was a trend-setter in India's chick lit genre,[9] plans to publish the story of the film in the form of a novel later in the year." Tense, plus WP:ASOF. Add a specific date or year. ✅


 * "Barring the music composers Vishal-Shekhar, he chose a completely new team to work with; he thought the presence of a fresh crew would keep him on his toes always. He thought people who he knew too well from before might influence him to overlook mistakes in film making.[16]" This would be better suited for the Filming section. ✅
 * If you read through again, the Filming section contains stuffs only about Filming. Choosing a team, selecting crew members, locations settings would all constitute to pre-production stage or call it as a development phase. Hence included that under Development. Please give a second thought and then if you strongly insist, I shall do so. --Msrag (talk) 09:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Not really. The bits about the crew are directly related to the crew which will do the filming, hence it should be ideally present in the Filming section, at the beginning. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok done but it forms as the second sentence and not as the beginning.--Msrag (talk) 09:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "the former was amused to see that the actor was even shorter than himself." This sentence is totally unnecessary and not at all related to the film. ✅


 * The Charulata bit present in the Filming section is repeated in the Allusions section. Better to remove from the Filming part. ✅


 * I'm rather skeptical of the Characters section. Most of it would be better off merged with the Cast section. I'd be willing to discuss this issue. ✅
 * Please have a look at the discussion here. It was decided to include all three sections as the characters of the film were thought about in minute detail. We tried combining that with Cast section but that would look like an incomplete section with info added for only 3-4 characters and the rest of the cast would be left blank. It gave a look of "incomplete." --Msrag (talk) 09:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That's alright. But at least bring the Characters section up, just after the Casting section. Placing the Characters section at the end of Production looks odd. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:08, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Several of RD Burman's Hindi and Bengali composition" It should be compositions. ✅


 * "have been used" Tense problem: "were used". I'd suggest a thorough comb-through to change the tenses to past, since the film is released. ✅


 * "praising the amalgam of" I believe the word is "amalgamation".
 * Both stands right. Amalgam would mean the mixture, Amalgamation would mean the process of mixing. I feel Amalgam is more apt.
 * That's alright. I'll strike out the comment. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "crediting the director's last two" A better word would be "owing to the director's..." ✅


 * "to show people asking for help finding him" Missing comma, plus slight re-wording needed. ✅


 * "the film was exclusively promoted" Uh, exclusively promoted? ✅
 * Removed the word 'exclusive' though what I meant was the film was specially and exclusively promoted in Kolkata (leaving the rest of the country) since the city being the backdrop. I still feel some word has to be used there to show the difference between the promotions in Kolkata and the rest of the country.--Msrag (talk) 10:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:UNDUE. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 10:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "with their notebooks for her glimpse" Huh? It should be "a glimpse of her". ✅


 * "Balan, distributed Kahaani's music cds" Extra comma present, plus CDs, not cds. ✅


 * "who had been waiting for her since afternoon" Completely unnecessary statement. ✅


 * "Gamers can also get in touch" Tense. ✅


 * "They also stand to win a chance to meet Balan and an opportunity to win movie merchandise and tickets" Highly promotional. This entire section needs re-arrangements and re-wording. ✅
 * Changed tense, re-worded, removed unnecessary promotional sentences.


 * "Though the film garnered critical acclaim, it was a slow starter at the box office, opening to a poor response on the first day[65][66] but gradually picking up by the end of its first week theatrical run. It was declared as "super hit" by BoxOfficeindia.[67]" Better suited for Box Office section. ✅


 * "The film is termed as one of the rare Hindi films to receive an average rating of just under 5 stars from critics. ... IMDB included the film in their list of The Top 50 Thrillers of all time making it the only Indian film to be featured in the list, ranking at 12.[51]" Better suited for Critical Reception section. ✅


 * The Controversy section has bits of very poor prose. Please re-word and clean up. ✅
 * Reworked and Re-worded entire paragraph. --Msrag (talk) 11:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The Social Screening section is too small to warrant a separate sub-section. I suggest merging with the first paragraph of the Release section.
 * Agree its small, but merging it with Release would lose its importance and notability. I feel let the reader read it as a separate information. Would like to wait for a second opinion.--Msrag (talk) 12:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Prices of the Home Media bits should not be there. Additionally, the section is very small. ✅
 * Removed the prices of DVD's. To solve the 'section is very small' problem, will be adding Satellite rights and television premiere info tonight. Should be better then. --Msrag (talk) 12:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "the film received highly positive reviews from critics" Slightly unencyclopedic. ✅


 * The Critical Reception section should have sentences of the form "Reviewer rated/gave/awarded the film X stars out of Y, stating/saying/commenting, "[quote]". Please ensure that this is followed universally. ✅


 * Additionally, avoid writing Rediff.com and state it as simply Rediff. ✅


 * "Kahaani was successful in international box office too" A "the" is missing, plus avois "too" and use the more encyclopedic "as well". ✅


 * "Director Sujoy Ghosh portrays Kolkata in a way which is mostly brimming with warm, sympathetic inhabitants. The film offers multitude of glimpses of everyday life of the city." Is this a quote? It surely sounds like one. If not, this needs re-wording and more neutrality. ✅
 * It is indeed a quote. Provided the quotation marks, and the reference.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Indian words like luchis need to be italicized everywhere. Please do so. ✅


 * "Cinematographer Setu was able to catch the various moods of the city effectively through the lens," Personal opinion. In fact, much of this section sounds like a number of personal opinions of critics/experts which have been strung together and stated as fact. That's against policy. Another example is this:- "Sometimes too loud and lacking subtlety, the film failed to reach the level of portrayal of the city as was done in Satyajit Ray's Calcutta trilogy" ✅
 * Changed the sentence "Cinematographer Setu was able to catch the various moods of the city effectively through the lens" to "The visuals of the city were praised in the review in Rediff,...".
 * This section indeed is personal opinion of several reviewers or authors. So is the section "Critical response". There is no other way to do this as otherwise the section would be original research. As an example, Sometimes too loud and lacking subtlety, the film failed to reach the level of portrayal of the city as was done in Satyajit Ray's Calcutta trilogy... is a summary statement of the article referenced. It is not original research, it is based on the reference provided. On the other hand, if you think it is too much personal touch of the editor, then we will have to quote specific portions of the article, which in your opinion perhaps would be too many cut-pastes and stringing together. The balance, undoubtedly, is difficult to reach between original research and too many quotations. In this particular instance, the sentence does not end there, it incorporates a quotation from the referenced article to explain what was the level of Calcutta trilogy that is being compared.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have re-written the section to show what I meant. Please check and point out if I have made any unexpected blunders. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Some words you brought within quotation marks are actually not copy-paste from source, rather thematic translation. So, I unquoted those parts. I re-inserted the quote at the end describing the menacing level of Kolkata portrayed in the Calcutta trilogy, as this is the level that Kahaani was told to be missing, by some authors.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * At this late stage, you don't need to write "Director Sujoy Ghosh". Simply Ghosh would do. ✅


 * The section Kolkata in Limelight is rather incorrectly named. Since the major section is Impact, the sub-section should ideally be named as City, since the section deals with the impact on the city. ✅
 * I guess simply 'Kolkata' sounds more better than 'City.' What do you say?--Msrag (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 10:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Tense problems still remain in the article, example:- "Shilpa Rathnam from CNN IBN states that" should be "stated that". Please change the tenses throughout the article and not on only the sentences I point out. ✅


 * "that would remind people of the past acts" The word "that" does not fit well. It should be "as" or "since". ✅


 * "In past" A "the" is missing. ✅


 * "entire controversial scene and explained them" Missing "to". ✅


 * "and removed their objections" "Removed" is incorrect, it should be "withdrew". ✅


 * "Sukanya Verma from Rediff awarded 4 out of 5 stars" A missing "the film". ✅


 * Italicize Kahaani in the Subhash K Jha quote. Btw, add the K in Subhash Jha as well. And two quotes from a single reviewer are not necessary; please get rid of either one. ✅


 * "Shomini Sen from Zee News rated 4 out of 5 stars" Same as Sukanya Verma. ✅


 * The second paragraph concerning the ending should start with a descriptive sentence rather than just dive into the reviews. Before the Rituparna Chatterjee review, add a sentence like, "However, a number of reviewers criticized the climax and certain features of the film, feeling that they deviated from the general style of the film." ✅


 * "by the end of its first week theatrical run" Missing "of". ✅


 * "in which 75 lakh (US$149,600)" Of which, not in which. ✅


 * "net gross" should be avoided; use simply net or even nett. ✅


 * "on its first weekend" In its first weekend. ✅


 * "its production cost 8 crore" Missing "of". ✅


 * "BoxOfficeIndia declared the film "Super Hit"" Missing "a". Same with "The film made worldwide gross of 104 crore (US$20.75 million)[1] within 50 days of its release." ✅


 * "Director Sujoy Ghosh admitted several instances of allusions" Missing "to". ✅


 * "Ghosh reported that" Ghosh is not a news reporter. It should be "said" or "commented". ✅


 * "where the actress Madhabi Mukherjee playing a lonely wife enjoys glimpses" Two commas should be added.
 * ✅ till here. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * "Framing comes from Mahanagar..." I didn't understand what this means. Perhaps some clarification is needed in the article text. ✅
 * I changed the sentence to " He acknowledged the inspiration of framing of the visuals from Mahanagar (1963), another film directed by Ray noted for its portrayal of Kolkata", with a wikilink for "Framing". Is it more understandable now? If not, we'd add (perhaps within parenthesis) what "framing" means.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "were compared with similar technique" Missing "a" (again). ✅


 * "described as one of the characters in the film" This is a repetition from above. Please remove it (from the Kolkata section). ✅


 * "has been the favorite destination for filmmakers" Eh? I think you mean "has become the favorite destination". And I would not go so far as to say that Kolkata has become the "favorite" destination. Discussion required. ✅


 * "Portraying the city as colourful and vibrant in the film" Another repetition. And yet again, no need of writing "director Sujoy Ghosh" here, just Ghosh would do. ✅


 * "presence in the Indian Cinema" No need of "the". ✅


 * "in the city dominated by Bengali" Its supposed to be "a" instead of "the". ✅


 * "as a recurrent theme" I'm guessing that by theme, you are actually meaning "location". ✅


 * WP:OVERLINK for Indian cinema in the Kolkata section. ✅


 * "caught the locales of the snow-capped mountains" Caught? I think you mean captured. ✅


 * "has become a tourist spot" Tense. ✅


 * "among for the local crowd of Kolkata" I think you meant simply "among the local crowd". ✅


 * "The place situated on Sarat Bose Road in the south of the city attracted hundreds of visitors since the release of the film" Two commas needed. Better to write "southern part of the city" rather than "south of the city". ✅


 * "glimpse of the room number 15" Unnecessary "the". ✅


 * You need not mention the exact tariffs of the guest house rooms. Simply saying that Room 15 was the most expensive is adequate. ✅
 * Well I agree the tariffs mentioned are not that important but I feel its good to be there for the international readers to get an idea of the tariffs of such budget class economy hotels. It makes an interesting read to know that a film like Kahaani was shot in a room of a mere tariff of around 2000rs. Hence the US converted price is also included there.--Msrag (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "the rooms in the guest house are well equipped with basic modern facilities and there exists a computerized registration system to keep records of the visitors" Tense. ✅


 * "With Kahaani as the USP for the hotel and banking on the high demand," The two bits don't seem to gel with each other, sounding rather odd. Please re-word. ✅
 * See it sounds good now.--Msrag (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "the hotel plans to increase the per-day tariffs" Tense. ✅


 * "Nomoshkar, Aami Bob Biswas... Ek minute" Italicizations required for the Bengali words. ✅


 * "Ghosh admitted his intentions of continuing the film" Missing "to". ✅


 * "the film as part of an ongoing series." Missing "a". ✅


 * "in the Tamil and Telugu languages" No need of "the" and "languages". ✅


 * "The company that produced popular reality shows on Indian television such as Bigg Boss and Khatron ke Khiladi plans to venture into films with the remake of Kahaani being their first project." Unnecessary trivia. You can keep the info that it was their first film venture, but all others are unnecessary. ✅


 * "the story has a strong emotional connect" Tense. ✅


 * "will be working with a leading director" Tense, re-wording necessary so as to accommodate the tense. ✅


 * Lead: "Ghosh has admitted to using several allusions" Tense. I have lost count of the number of times I have had to point out tense problems, but I'm coming to the end of my patience regarding this matter. For nay article you nominate in the future, make sure that the tense is correct. Why do so many tense problems exist? In the lead alone, there is one more:- "critics have compared the twist ending". ✅
 * Tried to minimize now, but will be sorry if you still find more. :( --Msrag (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * No references required in the lead if the main body has the content in a sourced manner. ✅


 * Durga Puja should not be italicized, being a festival. ✅


 * "In an interview with Rajeev Masand of IBN Live" Its CNN-IBN, not IBN Live (which is a specific show in the channel). ✅


 * "like computer hackings, which was tailored for urban audience" The "computer hackings" bit is unnecessary. Plus its audiences, not audience. ✅

Otherwise alright. The moment these are fixed, I shall pass this. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Everything listed here so far is closed or answered. --Msrag (talk) 05:43, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you please postpone the announcement of this GA result for 1-2 days? -- Tito Dutta  ✉  13:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Review result on hold please!

I personally feel information in this file is incomplete. I am not a copyright expert, I may be wrong too. File:Vidya Balan in Kahaani.jpg. WP:NFCC, WP:NFCC etc should be filled! -- Tito Dutta ✉  13:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Image file
 * ✅ Removed file as of now. I have no idea on your concerns. Perhaps it can be added now or later by someone else if found with no issues.--Msrag (talk) 19:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Incomplete caption
 * [ [:File:Vidya Balan at success bash of 'Kahaani'.jpg]] Who is Parambrata in this group photo? Well, I know personally, but don't you think it should be mentioned in caption (right of Balan or man in black coat etc) -- Tito Dutta  ✉  13:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Solved


 * File:Traffic in Kolkata.jpg All I can understand this described Kolkata traffic, But how this is related to article? Is it a scene of the film? --Tito Dutta ✉  13:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No it is not a scene from the film but commonly seen in the film. The image is related to a review mentioned in the section Portrayal of Kolkata, "Ghosh pays a fond yet understated tribute to the city's essence and elements—yellow taxis, leisurely trams, congested traffic,..." Please see a discussion already happened here.

Lots of WP:OVERLINK problem in the article Parambrata Chatterjee linked 5 times, Saswata Chatterjee linked 4 times in the article.. Vidya Balan has been linked 6 times. Abir Chatterjee 3 times, Sujoy Ghosh 5 times etc etc... --Tito Dutta ✉  13:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Overlink
 * ✅ Everyone linked max 2-3 times which is the usual practice. Once in each: Infobox, Lead and Cast. I guess that should be fine.--Msrag (talk) 19:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Uploader has changed privacy of this video. Hence invalid reference! -- Tito Dutta  ✉  19:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * DEADREF
 * ✅ Replaced reference

See MOS:AMP, not very important but you can change Anvita Dutt & Sandeep Srivasta to Anvita Dutt and Sandeep Srivasta -- Tito Dutta  ✉  19:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ampersand


 * References

Seem to be alright, high-quality at least. However, there is a big formatting inconsistency in the references which I shall overlook as of now. If you aim to make this article a FA, make triply sure that the references are uniformly formatted.


 * Final overview


 * Well-written
 * The article suffered from a large number of grammar and tense problems, all of which have been rectified. Definitely a well-written article in terms of prose and flow. Complies with the MOS and general article hierarchy. Symbol support vote.svg


 * Factually accurate and verifiable
 * All necessary information is sourced to high-quality reliable sources. Initial problems regarding original research have been rectified. Symbol support vote.svg


 * Broad in its coverage
 * The article deals with all of the aspects of the film in a clear, concise manner without deviating to unnecessary details. Symbol support vote.svg


 * Neutral
 * The article satisfies the neutrality criteria by providing a balanced view-point of the film, regarding all comparable aspects. Symbol support vote.svg


 * Stable
 * With the exception of the necessary GA review changes, this article is very stable and thankfully free of edit wars/vandalism. Symbol support vote.svg


 * Illustrated
 * Article is illustrated with appropriate images, the non-free ones having adequate rationales. Any problems regarding the image have been discussed (by another reviewer) or have been taken up in previous talk page discussions. Captioning is suitable. Symbol support vote.svg


 * Overall
 * By the above standards, the article passes all the good article criteria, and is hence eligible to be promoted to the GA status. Symbol support vote.svg

Congratulations :). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 07:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)