Talk:Fashion (2008 film)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: SL93 (talk · contribs) 03:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

Quote - "Bhandarkar was amazed by the attention paid to the fashion industry by the media and the public, and thought delving into the fashion world intriguing." would need to be written as a quote due to it being close to "I was amazed at the overwhelming attention given to the fashion Industry by the media and the public. I thought the idea of delving deep into the fashion world was very interesting and intriguing."

Done: Added as a quote.—Prashant 04:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Bhandarkar (known for researching his subject matter to make his films as realistic as possible) did nearly eight months of research into the fashion industry, attending fashion weeks and shows to gain insight into how the industry was run." should have what is in the parentheses incorporated into the article without them.

The article meets Good Article criteria otherwise. SL93 (talk) 03:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Fixed all the issues.—Prashant 04:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am passing this article. SL93 (talk) 11:17, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as SL93 tried to go to GAR, but was reverted by Dr. Blofeld, I will add some of my own comments here. Count it as a GAR slash PR.
Lede needs information on the film's production, themes, and soundtrack. Feels like you're missing a whole paragraph.

Done: Added other information about production, themes, and soundtrack in the lead.—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indian drama film - We shouldn't combine blue links like this (WP:SEAOFBLUE).

Done: Removed.—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

co-written and co-produced by Madhur Bhandarkar starring Priyanka Chopra, with Kangna Ranaut, Mugdha Godse, Arjan Bajwa and Arbaaz Khan in supporting roles. - You are missing a conjunction here, at the very least. I'd actually split that sentence.

Done: Broke into two sentences.—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Despite being a women-centric film, it went on to gross ₹600 million (US$7 million) at the box office and was a commercial success. - How it is surprising that a "women's film" was a commercial success is unclear.

Done: Removed.—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The film is noted for being a commercial success despite a female cast and the absence of a male lead. - Partially repeats part of the above sentence.

Done: Tweaked.—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kangna Ranaut - refer to her as Kangna Ranaut or just Ranaut?
The film also won twice - No, it won two awards.
make it big - Not encyclopedic

Done—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

gay aspiring designer who assists designer - Repetition of "designer". Also, unclear if he remains gay throughout the film or if he's actually bisexual
Meghna's lingerie photos appear on the cover of a magazine, and are seen by her family. - Relation to the rest of the plot unclear at this time
The face of - Companies don't have faces; use less idiomatic language.
Shonali has a wardrobe malfunction, ending her career; her drug abuse worsens until she ends up in rehab. - Wardrobe malfunction is a euphemism; if this is important to the plot, say what happened.
(reviving her career and restoring her self-confidence). She realises that Shonali restored her self-confidence. - Repetitive
Feels like the plot could be trimmed a bit.

Done: Tweaked the plot section.—Prashant 06:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:CASTLIST, you should not have nearly as many entries in your cast list. Honestly I think such sections are not needed, particularly if you have a fairly well developed plot summary.

I think it's fine to have a cast section. It depends on the number of cast members in a film. Plot doesn't have all the names. So, it's fine.—Prashant 06:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Check for dablinks

Done: Checked and removed disambiguation link.—Prashant 06:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In a 2006 interview with CNN-IBN, Madhur Bhandarkar mentioned that he was preparing to make a film based on the fashion industry; he thought the lack of Indian films on this industry prompted him to do so. - Find a way to avoid repeating "industry"
He admitted - So having an interest in fashion is dishonorable now?
the common man - Use gender neutral language, particularly since the main characters are women.
Known for researching his subject matter to make his films as realistic as possible, Bhandarkar did nearly eight months of research into the fashion industry, attending fashion weeks and shows to gain insight into how the industry was run. - Repetition again (research/research, industry/industry)
the story is fictional and does not reflect anyone's life. - Does not reflect anyone's life sounds unencyclopedic
The media also reported that the film revolved around two gay fashion designers; Bhandarkar denied this, saying the film did not revolve around male characters but had female protagonists. However, he admitted that the one of the film's sub-plots might explore the rivalry between two (male) fashion designers. - We just read the plot, we know the "two gay fashion designers" is a load of s***. You should rephrase this to make it clear that these were rumors or otherwise put it in a more historical perspective.

Done: Tweaked the development section.—Prashant 08:15, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the lead role in the fim - ...
Chopra initially refused the film offer, - Logic of the paragraph is off. You have her signing (as if she did it of her own volition), then balking.
the media reported that Chopra was unhappy with the first draft of the film, and wanted changes in the script. Bhandarkar agreed to rewrite, since he was also dissatisfied with the initial draft. - Not part of casting, but production
Samir Soni and Harsh Chhaya were cast as the gay designers in the film. - this and the preceding sentences are both quite short and can be combined effortlessly
giving a documentary feel to the film. - According to whom?

Done: Tweaked the casting section.—Prashant 08:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the point of the Characters section? It essentially reiterates the plot. If you want to keep the actresses' quotes, you could probably merge this and casting into the "cast" section above (which would give you a reason to keep that section).

Done: Tweaked the character section and merged it with casting section.—Prashant 09:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

she the job challenging - ...
she kept the looks contemporary, intending to keep them classical rather than trend-based. - How can something be contemporary (at the same time as something else) and classical?

Done: Tweaked the sting section.—Prashant 09:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for now... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:45, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

wardrobe malfunction - Again...
Bandra - Link?
according to Bhandarkar, it was a sensitive scene and a sensitive issue. - Why?
six kilograms - needs a convert template
The film's climactic scene was supposed to be filmed in Paris, with the Eiffel Tower as a backdrop when Chopra walks the ramp at Paris Fashion Week - Why link Paris? 99% of our readers know it
was not able to shoot there. - was not able or was not allowed?
key scenes with Chopra, Raj Babbar and Kiran Juneja (Chopra's parents in the film) were filmed in Chandigarh for authenticity; Bhandarkar wanted to bring the essence of the city alive in the scenes - Repetition of scenes
Did you address the close paraphrasing issues yet?

Done: Tweaked the filming section.—Prashant 09:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to Nikhat Kazmi - Why is this person worth quoting?
glam-n-glitz moments - should be in quotes if this is the wording actually used. Not encyclopedic.
The fashion shows, the stunning models, the superb styling, the vibrant colours and the behind the scenes drama is worth every penny spent on the ticket. - Okay, so you haven't addressed close paraphrasing issues.
It is a film titled `Fashion’ but doesn’t significantly talk about the clothes! [Or] the talent, creativity, and passion for work, which forms a central part of the industry. - This is copied directly from the source without attribution
Quotes need to be cut back; try paraphrasing better
most of whom have been portrayed "as gay designers and exploitative agency owners. 'Bhandarkar could have done without gross generalisations. It makes the movie shallow and over-dramatic'". - what's with the quotes within quotes
who had similar experiences several years ago. - When?

Done: Tweaked the themes and allusions section.—Prashant 09:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Album section also needs to be better paraphrased. Also, past or present tense?

Done: Tweaked the soundtrack section.—Prashant 09:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kimaya is? Cellucom?
U/A certification - Meaning?
the DCW did not want anyone profiting from her life. - Why?
to Nagpal's character. - to Nagpal's character or to Nagpal?

Done: Tweaked the marketing and release section.—Prashant 10:18, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure all of the apostrophes are of the straight variety and not slanted.
Watch for overlinking!

Done: Corrected overlinking.—Prashant 10:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That list of awards is a little big. Any way to avoid such a long list and so much white space? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:38, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still lots of non-straight apostrophes and quotation marks
Still heavy on the quotes; I refuse to touch most of the "reception" section until you start paraphrasing.

Done: Paraphrased some of the quotes.—Prashant 04:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Despite being a women-centered film - once again, how women-centered inherently means it won't be a financial success is not clear

The citied sources clears everything as it says the same.—Prashant 04:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That the cited source supports the claim does not mean readers of this article will understand why such a claim was made. You need to elaborate here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

star-studded cast - Not encyclopedic
The film is noted for being a commercial success despite a female cast and the absence of a male lead. - repeats "Despite ...". I'd just remove "Despite ... film" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:48, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Tweaked.—Prashant 04:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The nominator is refactoring other's talk page comments like this and this. I have left a level 3 warning on his talk page and not 1 or 2, considering past behavior. - Vivvt (Talk) 02:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]