Talk:Santosh Subramaniam/GA2

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:48, 5 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):
 * The prose is quite hopeless. It needs thorough copy-editing so that it it is written in clear plain English, without elementary grammatical mistakes
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Behindwoods does not appear to be a reliable source.
 * I fixed two and tagged three dead links using WP:CHECKLINKS
 * Idle Brain does not appear to be a reliable source.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This article is very badly written and I am going to fail this on those grounds alone. Several dubious sources are used. There are dead links. If you wish to nominate films for Good Article status, please ensure that they meet the good article criteria before doing so. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This article is very badly written and I am going to fail this on those grounds alone. Several dubious sources are used. There are dead links. If you wish to nominate films for Good Article status, please ensure that they meet the good article criteria before doing so. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This article is very badly written and I am going to fail this on those grounds alone. Several dubious sources are used. There are dead links. If you wish to nominate films for Good Article status, please ensure that they meet the good article criteria before doing so. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)