Talk:Keechaka Vadham/GA1

GA Review

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

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?

@Dr. Blofeld: 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:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)