Talk:Shreya Ghoshal/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 09:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll have this to you soon JAG  UAR   09:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, it does have a good context, but still needs to be shaped in more accurate format. Dere vation Give Me Five 05:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Are you the reviewer here? Few days back you nominated a film article for GA which did not even have the plot section. See Talk:Singh_Is_Bliing. I do not consider you competent enough to review another article for GA. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:54, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * at least i am reviewing not vandalising. Plus i m working on such articles to match G.A. Its not any stub article. Foremost its sort of a defamation. Dere vation Give Me Five 11:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If User:Jaguar is reviewing it, you are not needed here unless you think they are not doing a good job. So just stay out. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:17, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok. But stay away from Qubool Hai at least though i reviewed that! Dere vation Give Me Five 11:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't bring discussions of other pages elsewhere. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * " She is the recipient of four National Film Awards, five" - this needs a semi-colon
 * Done


 * I feel that the lead could be expanded slightly in order to summarise the article better - a requirement for the GA criteria. Some mentions of her early career might be useful
 * Done Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:53, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * My biggest concern is that there is some serious WP:OVERLINK in the Music career section. I'd strongly advise cutting down on a few links, so that the article concentrates more on prose and less on list-y subjects
 * Unlike west, India doesn't really have album culture. Singer's sing song's in movies. I can't find any other way to write about her career without mentioning her movie names. Article's that are overlinked are the film's in which she has given her voice. Should I delink them? Any suggestion on what should be done? Yashthepunisher (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That's OK. I should have taken in mind that the album culture was slightly different from what I've seen on Wikipedia. I think de-linking or cutting at least a few wouldn't hurt, see what you would like to keep? JAG  UAR   19:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Removed some non-notable films. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * "she participated in the 75th Children's Special episode" - does Children and Special have to be capitalised?
 * Done


 * "According to him, Ghoshal's voice" - I got lost here, according to who?
 * Mentioned


 * "with established singers like" - such as
 * Done


 * "She was only 16 when she recorded the first song" - I'd remove "only", as it sounds a tad informal
 * Removed


 * "Ghoshal was a playback singer many times in 2003" - might sound better as Ghoshal was performed as a playback singer numerous times in 2003 or something similar?
 * Done


 * "The year 2007 started for Ghoshal with "Barso Re"" - this opening sounds a bit informal
 * Rephrased


 * "After singing for films like" - such as
 * Done


 * I would consider losing or doing something else with the second paragraph in the 2008–present section. It is unsourced and presents itself as just a list of people she worked with! Although it's not a serious problem for GA, I would recommend cutting at least half of the names (the least known ones, as you see fit) and putting some more prose in there, if possible
 * Removed


 * "In 2012, she broke into Forbes Celebrity 100" - broke into?
 * Rephrased Yashthepunisher (talk) 17:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

, I think i have resolved all comment of yours. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

On hold
Sorry for the late review, I admit I've had to rush this as I'm meant to be going out within a few minutes as I type this, but once all of the above are addressed then this should be good to go. It is comprehensive and well written, but I did notice that there one section has a long list of people which should really be altered. Other than that, nice work with this! JAG UAR   15:23, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for addressing them, and again I apologise for my short delay in reviewing this (it won't happen again). This article now meets the GA criteria, well done!  JAG  UAR   18:39, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, thank you for a comprehensive review, :) and you don't need to apologise for the delay. Yashthepunisher (talk) 02:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)