Talk:Keechaka Vadham/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 07:57, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Will review later, very old film!♦ Dr. Blofeld  07:57, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Reading now♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * "The film was based" -don't we use present tense for films? It is a lost film though so I guess..
 * "invest on the production house" -on?
 * "However, some of Nataraja Mudaliar's relatives objected to it for they felt that it was not a proper story for his debut venture.[1] But " -never good to have However and but following each other
 * "The production for the film cost ₹35,000,[a] which was then considered high, revealing Nataraja Mudaliar's inexperience in filmmaking.[1]" -not sure how that reveals his inexperience, you mean that he wouldn't haven known how much filmmaking would cost? Seems a bit OR, is that in the source?
 * "Later a difference of opinion arose between him and his investors." -vague, can you elaborate?

Resolved all your comments. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me 05:44, 6 April 2016 (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: ♦ Dr. Blofeld  06:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)