Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vidya Balan/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 06:54, 2 December 2012.

Vidya Balan

 * Nominator(s): S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 11:18, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because Vidya Balan is one rare Indian actress who has dared to step beyond the boundaries imposed by a male-dominated Indian film industry. I have worked hard on this article (it recently passed a GA nomination) and I think it meets the FA criteria. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 11:18, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments by User:Dharmadhyaksha
 * Actor or actress? "Her parents were supportive of her decision to become an actor." Else everywhere it is actress.
 * Done.


 * So she starred in Hum Paanch while she was 16. And then she went on to do her bachelors? That's the normal chronology i suppose. But this is not clear through the article.
 * Done.


 * What was her role in her first film Bhalo Theko?
 * Added.


 * "The film, based on the Jessica Lal murder case saw Balan play the first real-life character of her career, that of Sabrina Lal, Jessica's reticent sister." But she played Safdar Hashmi's wife in 2008's Halla Bol.
 * She she did not play his wife in the film. Her character was fictional. Does that point require clarification in the article?
 * She played Devgn's wife, who in turn plays Hashmi. Ofcourse, he doesn't play Hashmi, but is named as Khan in the film. When writing Devgn's biography it will be written that he played Hashmi. In that relation Balan played his wife Moloyshree Hashmi. Anyways... i suppose your objection to this inclusion is based on the fact that the film was inspired from Hashmi's life but was not a real biopic. Hence your hesitation, right? In such case i would avoid calling Balan's portrayal of Lal as "the first real-life character". §§ §§ {T/C} 06:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I see the point. There's a bit of a confusion. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Her co-starts winning awards is missing. Rani won in No One Killed Jessica. Amitabh won many in Paa. Arundathi Nag won NFA for Paa. The article gives impression that she alone won awards for these films.
 * I don't see how her co-stars winning awards is important to her biography. Maybe I can incorporate the fact that Paa won four National Awards and such.
 * Its important in the sense that it gives wrong impression that the film was successful all because of her. Paa's success credit goes to BigB, his makeup and acting. For NOKJ Rani's return after 2-3 yrs, her bold and beep-full dialogues and all played quite a role in it's commercial success. Currently it looks like the commercial success is all due to Balan. §§ §§ {T/C} 06:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It never says that Paa or for that matter No One Killed Jessica was a success only because of Balan. I agree that Paa was Mr. Bachchan's film, but it was a career-defining role for her as well. In the articles of the respective films, it needs to be noted that all the actors contributed to the success of the film. But her biography is about how she individually contributed to the film. If you look at other actor/actress biographies, they all follow the same policy. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It sort of gives that impression. NOKJ released - alongside Rani Mukerji - role description - film's contrasting reviews - but Balan was all good good - commercial success - absence of a male lead - FF nomination. Mukerji? Hogi kisi naach gane mein. Wikipedia says that film was all Balan's!! §§ §§ {T/C} 05:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Balan did win a lot of praises for the film. And if you see Mukerji's article you will see the comments that she earned for her portrayal. And I must add that a lot of critics did not like Mukerji's performance in the film. I still think that it is a bit unfair to praise a co-star in someone's biography. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Do as you wish! §§ §§ {T/C} 03:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I feel her "Gooooooood Moooooooorninnnng Mumbai!" needs to be mentioned.
 * Is this notable?
 * Probably not needed. The dialogue is not one of the very famous ones in Bollywood. The phrase deserves mention in the film article, but not in her biography.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right. Ignore this comment. But speaking of dialogues, is her "Entertainment! Entertainment! Entertainment!" dialogue worth noting then? §§ §§ {T/C} 06:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * There is that same old Khalid Mohmed and Taran Adarsh. What did south Indian critics say about Silk? What did Bengali critics talk about Bagchi?
 * Included a local Kolkata review for Kahaani.
 * I actually removed the mention of the local Kolkata publication, and retained the review itself. Again, the article of this film will definitely need to mention Kolkata based reviews as the city plays a major role in the film. However, in her biography article, whether the critic is from Kolkata or Delhi does not matter. On the other hand, the point raised by Dharmadhyaksha is justified that the critics Khaled Mohamed, Taran Adarsh etc have Ben used many times. So, other noteworthy critis' reviews are definitely good addition.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Dwaipayanc is right. Publishing place does't matter. I was actually expecting some critic who works in those regional films. Maybe there won't be any such reviews for Kahaani as Balan herself did not play a Bengali woman. But her Silk should have been commented by some. Try getting help from Vensatry or SoS or others who might search reviews in regional languages. §§ §§ {T/C} 06:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * You know, The Dirty Picture itself is a "Hindi" film and not a Tamil/Telegu/Malayalam film. Out of all the praise that she received for the film, Khalid Mohamed's review was the most precise and to-the-point. And that's why I included it. I don't see the need to include more reviews for that. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * "Her weight fluctuations" comes suddenly after her religious affiliations. Any better place to park that?
 * Her role in promotions of films is missing. Kahaani, The Dirty Picture and Ishqiya had seen her promoting films in the same getup.
 * Mentioned the promotions of Kahaani.

Might come with more points. But over all the article looks good. Best wishes for the FAC. §§ §§ {T/C} 06:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the comments, Dharmadhyaksha. Some points had totally skipped my mind. Will incorporate them. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 07:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No probs! More point below.


 * For FA, i suppose her every work should me mentioned in words. Maybe a single liner about her cameos in various films would do, especially the only item song of her career.
 * Mentioned the notable extended cameo appearance in Urumi. S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)


 * "sixty television commercials"!!! I did not know that. I don't think they were all pre-film career. Do you think so? The source says that, but still. I only remember the Krack Cream. Shouldn't selective few ones from her earlier career be mentioned?


 * There are other sources which mention that she has done around sixty commercials before Bhalo Theko.


 * I don't find it necessary to mention her small appearances on television shows for promoting films, like talent hunt shows and such. But should Kaun Banega Crorepati and Koffee with Karan be mentioned? For KBC i would guess she must have donated her winnings. That definitely is worth mentioning.


 * Every Bollywood actor/actress who has appeared on Kaun Banega Crorepati has donated their money for charity. Hence, not notable enough. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * And to whom is also non-notable i suppose. §§ §§ {T/C} 05:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I think this topic warrants a larger discussion. Though, I don't see why this should hamper the nomination. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Do as you wish! §§ §§ {T/C} 03:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * She has walked few ramps also. Isn't any of it worth mentioning?§§ §§ {T/C} 06:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Again, I don't see how ramp walks are important to her biography. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, just for the sake of comprehensiveness, may be it is worthwhile to just mention in a sentence or two that she has done (honorary?) ramp-walking in a few fashion shows, like many other Indian actors (so, implying that there is nothing unique about that?). However, I am not really sure if appearing in KBC or Koffee with Karan is notable enough. Probably not (Film stars and celebrities do appear in so many shows as guests). Regarding the quote "Entertainment! Entertainment! Entertainment!", I figured out it is from The Dirty Picture (I did not know as I have not see the film, yet). In my opinion, it is not that notable. Also, that one item number in Ferrari Ka Sawari may be mentioned in the text, as it was the only item number in her career so far. Thanks Dharmadhyaksha for drawing attention to some greater details.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't know if they were honorary or paid ones.
 * Some media usages: SOTY is Bollywood’s adaptation of “Gossip Girl” on 35mm — entertainment, entertainment, entertainment!, I'm entertainment, says Vidya Balan, Entertainment, entertainment, entertainment - at IPL 5 opener!, Entertainment, entertainment, entertainment… and a raw nerve, Four days of entertainment, entertainment, entertainment!, Ekta Kapoor - "Audience wants - entertainment, entertainment, entertainment!". I won't prove how it is used on blogs, twitter, other forums, comedy shows, chat shows, etc. §§ §§ {T/C} 05:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I really don't see why this quote is so extremely important. It was a fun quote, along with a large number of similar ones used in "The Dirty Picture". Why single this one out? --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Do as you wish! §§ §§ {T/C} 03:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Category check needed. Some are redundant in presence of others; at least per my interpretation of those category titles.
 * If she is in Category:Indian television actors and Category:Indian film actors, she need not be in Category:Indian actors.
 * If she is in Category:Tamil actors, she need not be in Category:Tamil people.
 * And does she qualify under Category:Bengali television actors? §§ §§ {T/C} 05:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing these out. Done. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 05:55, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments - only a few random comments.
 * The linking of "Hindi" to "Bollywood" in the lead intro is quite WP:EASTEREGG-ish. She acted in several non-Bollywood Indian films. This was probably already discussed and i have no perfect solution to offer, but maybe just link to Hindi language or even to "Cinema of India".
 * avoid idioms and informal terms (f.e. flak, nerd).
 * "Due to these circumstances, film producers labelled her as a "jinx" and replaced her in all the twelve films that she had been contracted for." - this statement appears not completely accurate according to the source. The "jinx"-factor is only mentioned for a few of her cancellations, other cases have various other reasons. Some may have been influenced by the first event aswell, but the actual sentence omits all other factors and details. Obviously you can not mention every single detail, but it would be worthwhile to mention, that she was refused for various, different reasons and maybe add 1-2 details about the most notable rejections. It's an interesting phase of her career. GermanJoe (talk) 07:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for your comments, GermanJoe. In the lead, Hindi cinema refers to Bollywood films, while the other Indian language films that she acted in - Bengali and Malayalam - redirect to their respective film industries. However, I have addressed your other two issues.--S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 08:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment by Jesse V.
 * I notice that the article has some Soft 404 link problems. Please see its Checklinks entry. &bull; Jesse V.(talk) 00:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I see, but the links are fully functional. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 04:01, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment by Greatuser
 * I am in favor of article becoming a Featured article, Every info about her, is provided with a reliable source Greatuser (talk) 08:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support I did the GA review for this article. The article meets nearly all the criteria for FA. I am saying "nearly all" because I do not think I am competent enough to judge the article against crieterion 1a (whether its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard); my knowledge of the language is not that good.


 * Otherwise, the article is well-researched, comprehensive, neutral, pretty much stable, has appropriate lead and structure, follows consistent citation style, and is of appropriate length.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Image check all OK. 1 "Cc-by-sa-3.0-FilmiTadka" and 2 "Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama". Source and confirmation by OTRS-member provided. GermanJoe (talk) 09:03, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Support. Comments. This was a really interesting article, and I enjoyed reading it. My review concentrates on prose (nearly there), content, and MOS. I did not evaluate source reliability on a large scale because I am just not familiar with the non-newspaper sources used.
 * does the lead need to include where she lives?


 * Removed.


 * Do we need to know the occupations of her sister and brother-in-law? Seems more like trivia.


 * Removed information about brother-in-law, but retained her sister's profession.


 * Do we know what about Shabana Azmi and Madhuri Dixit appealed to her? I am not familiar with Indian films, so this means nothing to me.


 * Re-worded. Both Shabana Azmi and Madhuri are leading film actresses in India.


 * "Balan auditioned for and starred briefly in " - would it not be reasonable to conclude that if she starred briefly in a show that she had first auditioned? This writing appears elsewhere in the article too - too many words, in my opinion.


 * Agree. Re-worded.


 * Why was it a brief starring role? Did the show end (why?)?  Was her part written out?


 * Re-worded. She acted in only the first season of the show. Second season onward, she was replaced by another actress. However, no reliable source explains the reason for her leaving the show.


 * Any more information on why people thought she was a jinx after Chakram?


 * So, the Indian film industry is largely a male-dominated one and Mohanlal (the lead actor of Chakram) is an extremely popular actor. So, when a film starring him was shelved, film producers labelled Balan as the "jinx". Should I include this explanatory note?
 * Yes, if you have good sources, please include that information. That also helps to tie together the information about changing the perception of actresses. Karanacs (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Explanation added. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 05:29, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


 * "after shooting for the first schedule" - what is the first schedule?


 * I meant first shooting schedule. Re-worded.


 * Do we know why she was dropped in Run?


 * She was dropped without reason. Added.


 * Bhalo Theko wasn't first first starring role she was signed on for, per the paragraph before.


 * Changed.


 * "directed by debutante Abhishek Chaubey" - ??? in my culture, a debutante is a rich teenage girl with a foofy skirt


 * Haha, I meant debutant.
 * This is not a common word in American English, but I can't think of a short way to rewrite this. Karanacs (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * This reference does not explicitly list the source: See Kumar, Alok. "Film review — Parineeta". Retrieved 27 October 2007.  I checked PlanetBollywood but cannot tell if it is a reliable soruce or something like IMDB.


 * Changed the reference.

Karanacs (talk)


 * Thank you for the comments Karanacs. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments. Think this will be okay. Some early text is wobbly, as are a few referencing issues, but overall it appears thorough and the text is engaging. Lede:
 * "dressing sense" - Indian Eng? (my google search suggests possibly yes) I would have expected "dress sense"
 * Changed to "dress sense".

Early life
 * "a mix of Tamil and Malayalam". Don't need quote marks for something so unremarkable, just make it 'both Tamil and Malayalam'.
 * Changed.


 * "an experience which she describes as "truly memorable"". This seems to be neither engaging prose nor very enlightening. "Truly memorable" could mean good, bad or wierd. I don't think it helps and, unless there is some clarity in the sources about why it was memorable for her, I would omit that.
 * Removed.


 * "She later pursued a master's degree in sociology from the University of Mumbai." - I don't see this in the source. I'm also not convinced the source is reliable as it appears to be a story by a reader / listener of their knowledge of the person - not sure about quality / editorial control. Source #10 (not cited for this sentence) does cover the MA, but not which University.
 * Added a new source that mentions both the degree and the university.

Career
 * reference 17 mentions Mumbai University, but appears to be incorrectly titled.
 * Thanks for pointing this out. Corrected.


 * radio-jockey hyphenated, then later in the para, not hyphenated.
 * Removed the unnecessary hyphen.


 * "semi-biographic" - I'm not what this means and it isn't good prose. One of the sources (though not cited for this sentence - it appears two sentences later) says "a more than obvious but unacknowledged biopic".
 * Does semi-biographical sound better?


 * "multi-starrer". What??
 * Means an ensemble cast. Changed.


 * "skilfull" (in a quote) is I believe an incorrect spelling (accepted are skilful and skillful). Check the source?
 * Yes, my fault. It is "skilled".

Media image and artistry
 * ""she has toppled all dominating hero," can you check the quote? SHould this not read ""she has toppled the all dominating hero,"?
 * Corrected.

Good job. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad that you liked the article. And thank you for all the comments. I've made the necessary changes. Cheers. S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 11:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Delegate notes -- Smarojit, I don't think we've 'met' so if this is, as I'm assuming, your first FAC, welcome. Couple of things:
 * All award wins and nominations listed in the filmography are mentioned/cited in the main body of the article except 	the Filmfare Award for Best Actress nomination for Ishqiya -- this should be cited somewhere, and the main body makes sense for consistency.
 * I'll want to see a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing -- if one of the current reviewers can undertake, that's great, else we can list a request at WT:FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:41, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Ian. Yes, this is my first FAC. Thank you for your comments. I mentioned the Filmfare nomination for Ishqiya in the main body. :-) --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 14:53, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Ian, should I ask the reviewers above to do spot checks for the article? S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 06:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I've listed a request at WT:FAC, so let's see how we go there first. Worst comes to the worst I'll do it myself but I've other noms to walk through before we get to that. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:23, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. :) --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 10:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Spotchecks (not sure how many is enough, but here are some):
 * Article: Balan lives with her parents in Khar, a suburban neighbourhood in Mumbai.
 * Source: Vidya Balan is no more a Chembur resident. A couple of weeks ago, the actor moved into a plush 4-BHK in the western suburb of Khar with her parents. Vidya's new house also has an office (for her meetings), the entrance for which is separate from her residence.
 * Conclusion: fine.


 * Article: Rediff.com added that "her hesitant body language, her faith, her helplessness, her rage, her sorrow and her gratitude all come across beautifully".
 * Source: It makes Vidya Balan's [ Images ] stand-out act -- her hesitant body language, her faith, her helplessness, her rage, her sorrow and her gratitude all come across beautifully; you don't even notice her pared down dialogues -- all the more commend-worthy.
 * Conclusion: fine, although I don't know about Rediff from a source perspective. Notable? Is "Rediff.com" in the main text appropriate?
 * Rediff.com is one of the leading entertainment websites in India. So, I think it is notable enough to be mentioned in the main text. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 05:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If it's well known, couldn't we say "entertainment website Rediff" (not sure about the italics? not my best-known part of the MOS). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 09:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If "Rediff.com" is its official name (and not only its colloquial web name), it should be used. But i agree with Grandiose, that a brief qualifier like "entertainment website" (or whatever describes it best) would be helpful for the international reader. GermanJoe (talk) 09:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I see. But I am not sure what can be used to describe Rediff.com. It isn't only an entertainment website, but also a provider of news and shopping servies. It's something of an Indian counterpart to Yahoo! Do we really need to elaborate on that? --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 11:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the author for the quote and rediff.com is already mentioned previously as review source, so should be ok. GermanJoe (talk) 12:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks GermanJoe. :-) --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Article: "She was later cast as Isha Sahni, a single mother, in Sajid Khan's Heyy Babyy. Co-starring Akshay Kumar, Ritesh Deshmukh, and Fardeen Khan, the comedy film was a box-office success,[30] but garnered negative reviews from critics, as did Balan's performance. CNN-IBN's Rajeev Masand mentioned her as the "sore thumb" of the film, and members of the media criticised her wardrobe and make-up.[35][36]"
 * Sources: [30] accounts for "the comedy film was a box-office success". [35] says "The final straw comes in the form of Vidya Balan who plays the baby's real mum as a sort of Cruella de Ville character."... " but Vidya Balan sticks out like a sore thumb...Her wardrobe, her make-up, her hair - if I didn't know better I'd assume her staff had conspired against her for not paying their salaries on time." [36] is some sort of poll in a magazine where she "wins" 6.2% of the vote for worst actress.
 * Conclusions: well as a close paraphrasing check this isn't a problem. However on a more general point, I think this couple of sentences is badly constructed (as against FA standards - it's still pretty good!). I think we should have a straight-forward source for "She was later cast as Isha Sahni, a single mother, in Sajid Khan's Heyy Babyy." (actually missing - we have "the baby's real mum" but that's it). Perhaps you could says "She was later cast as Isha Sahni, a single mother, in Sajid Khan's Heyy Babyy, alongside co-stars Akshay Kumar, Ritesh Deshmukh, and Fardeen Khan.[New Ref]" Then we have the "the comedy film was a box-office success", which is fine. The final section, despite running across the last two sentences, is really "but garnered negative reviews from critics, as did Balan's performance. CNN-IBN's Rajeev Masand mentioned her as the "sore thumb" of the film, and members of the media criticised her wardrobe and make-up." I can't identify what [36] adds, so that just leaves this passage as a summary of [35], i.e. CNN-IBN. Can't work out what "sore thumb" really means here. In the article, it is impliedly related to costume and make-up, but I think it would be much easier to just say firstly, that she garnered negative reviews (perhaps another source can be found, perhaps [36] would do), and, secondly, one aspect of this was costume/make-up, referenced to the CNN-IBN article.


 * Source [36] also votes Balan as one of the "worst dressed" actresses of 2007 (due to Heyy Babyy). Anyway, I re-worded the sentences and specifically mentioned Rajeev Masand's criticism towards Balan's wardrobe and make-up in the CNN-IBN Review. --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 05:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

A few thoughts, Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 15:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for the comments, Grandiose. :) --S.M.A.R.O.J.I.T (talk) 05:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/ a high quality reliable source? It appears to be a news aggregator, not a true news company.
 * Not a news aggregator. Bollywood Hungama is a leading entertainment website for Hindi cinema. -- smaro jit  (talk to me) 04:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * What makes http://www.boxofficeindia.com/index.php a high quality reliable source?
 * Boxofficeindia.com is a RS. Refer earlier discussion here. (Also you had asked the same question here also.) §§ §§ {T/C} 04:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. BoxOfficeIndia is the "only" reliable source of information for box office figures in India; much like what BoxOfficeMojo is for Hollywood. All the Hindi cinema articles on Wikipedia use this website to quote their revenues. -- smaro jit  (talk to me) 04:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Likewise http://www.dnaindia.com/?
 * dnaindia.com is Daily News and Analysis (DNA). §§ §§ {T/C} 04:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It is a newspaper source, quite like The Times of India, The Hindu and Hindustan Times. -- smaro jit  (talk to me) 04:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.