Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Angrej/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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2018 [1].

Angrej

Nominator(s): VedantTalk 20:45, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a Punjabi film. This is my fifth attempt at a film FAC. Looking forward to constructive criticism. VedantTalk 20:45, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Kailash

Link romantic comedy. The lead says "conceived as a romantic comedy set in the British Punjab", referring to Angrej and not Goreyan Nu Daffa Karo. However, the development section does the opposite. Please clear up the confusion after reading the source. If Angrej is really a rom-com, add it to Indian romantic comedy films.
Please try and comply with WP:FILMCAST, by ensuring all starring actors are sourced. Besides, what is Varun Sharma's role? He isn't even sourced.
You might want to replace director of photography with cinematographer for preciseness, and because the article's name is the latter.
De-link any term you find too common. This gadget will help in such cases.
I'm pretty sure you mean to link Drishyam to this.
The "publisher=" field in many refs will need to be replaced with "website=". The ProveIt gadget will help ease the process.

Optional comment: For a movie released as recently as 2015, is this how far you could expand the article? If that is so, never mind if that's how much the Punjabi media covered. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:26, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've (hopefully) fixed everything. And yes Kailash, this really covers everything that is out there. VedantTalk 16:08, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Just one last comment: the lead says "Conceived as a romantic comedy set in the pre-partitioned Punjab", while the body says "Gill, who also starred in the film described it as a love story set in rural Punjab of 1945". It may be consistent in the sense of Angrej being a romance film, but you may have to mention somewhere in the article that it is a romantic comedy (although Tribune's Jasmine Singh calls it "cheerful reminder of love in the old times", we need a statement from the cast/crew about the genre). This source, which you have already added, quotes Ammy Virk as saying, "I feel that “Angrez” will be able to break the cliché of romantic-comedy formula films in Punjabi and give more exposure to artistes". See how you can use it. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the bit about the comic element of the film Kailash from the same source that describes Gill view of the film. Do you think that the new version solves the problem? VedantTalk 13:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does. I later reviewed the article and saw the awards section mentions the PTC Punjabi Film Awards' year but no date. According to this source, the event took place on 14 April 2016. Please mention that. But nonetheless, this article already has my support. --Kailash29792 (talk) 04:08, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the date and the ref Kailash, thank you so much for taking out time to review this. VedantTalk 11:27, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

Please add ALT text for the infobox image.
For this part (the film chronicles the love story of a young man from the province of Punjab) of the lead, I would clarify both parties involved in the love story. Is it a love story between a young man and a young woman? A love story between family? Friends?
I think for this part (which featured vocals from Gill, Virk and Sunidhi Chauhan.) of the lead, it should be “features” instead of “featured”.
For this part (The performances of the cast, the film's production design, and the humour), I do not think you need “the film’s” as it is clear from the context.
For this part (grossed a total of around ₹125 million in its entire theatrical run), I do not think you need the word “entire”.
I am confused by this part (he said that idea of an Indian wedding in the period Punjab). In the Wikipedia article, Punjab is referenced as a province, so I am not sure what you mean by “period”. I am not familiar with Indian history to be honest so apologies if I am missing something.
For this part (The album consisted of seven songs), I believe that it should be “consists” instead of “consisted”.
For this part (The sets, the props, the dresses and dialect,), I am not sure the links for “sets” and dialect” are necessary.

Great work with the article. Once my comments are addressed, I will support this for promotion. Have a wonderful rest of your day! Aoba47 (talk) 03:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've hopefully fixed everything Aoba47. Thanks for taking out time despite your wiki-break. I'll try and make sure I read that section before posting at the talk next. VedantTalk 06:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

All the references look fine to me, save the BookMyShow one. I know that it is a ticket booking website, having booked there for a few films myself, but you can try and find information somewhere else, say here at BBFC, Moviefone and TOI. — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced the BMS source with new the refs Ssven2, thank you for the review. VedantTalk 13:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support My concerns were addressed when it was a GAN. The article has also improved since then. Good luck! Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Yash. I appreciate it. VedantTalk 08:26, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well detailed, researched and has proper referencing. After a thorough read, i found no notable issues to point out. To the best of my knowledge, i can confidently say that this article meets the criteria for a FA. Regards, Pavanjandhyala 17:56, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Pavan. I appreciate it. VedantTalk 08:26, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Angrej poster.jpg: License, rationale and use seem fine for me. It has appropriate ALT text.
File:Sargun Mehta at a pre-Diwali party.jpg: Appropriately licensed and tagged. It has appropriate ALT text.

It passes the image review. Aoba47 (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the image review Aoba47, I appreciate it. Let me know if you need help with any article. :) VedantTalk 08:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment: This has four supports, but I think I'd like a little more commentary, and a little more reference to the FA criteria, particularly with reference to sourcing and prose. If no-one has done this soon, I will approach a few people myself and ask for a little further review. Sarastro (talk) 20:06, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if Mike Christie would be able to take a look at this? And maybe Tony1 if he's around? Sarastro (talk) 20:43, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll have time, probably tomorrow, but if not then this weekend. Feel free to ping me again if I haven't posted anything by Monday. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:11, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tony1

Prose sample: lead.

"it stars Amrinder Gill, Sargun Mehta, and Aditi Sharma in lead roles." As opposed to starring in minor roles.
"the film chronicles the love story of a young man and a woman belonging to different social strata" — so the woman isn't young? The "a" woman increases the probability of that meaning. Maybe: "the film chronicles the love story of a young man and woman from different social strata". "Chronicles" stresses the temporality of the account ... over time. All films must do that, but here you emphasise it. It would be appropriate if it were over a considerable period, or featured flash-backs and flash-forwards, etc. Otherwise "centres on" or "concerns"?
"Angrej has Ammy Virk, Binnu Dhillon, Anita Devgan, Sardar Sohi, and Nirmal Rishi in supporting roles; it marked the feature film debut for Mehta and Virk." In another language the "has" might be idiomatic. But here, an awkward metaphorical agency (the film does the having). Sometimes tranferred agency works in English, sometimes not. "features"? Or x, y, and z play supporting roles? Try to join with a comma, without the "it" back-ref.
"The film was shot in ~~the~~ rural ~~parts of~~ Rajasthan and Punjab over ~~the course of~~ 40 days, with Navneet Misser ~~serving~~ as ~~the~~ cinematographer." Thorough audit for grammatical simplification is required. English wants simple, plain, unlike just about every other language. Ironically, it makes English more elegant, not less.
"Production designer Raashid Rangrez paid particular attention to the film's sets and costumes as he wanted them to accurately represent the Punjab of the 1940s.—"film's" is understood ... it's a contextual redundancy. So is "as he wanted them" (unless he tried and failed). You'll need a comma before it.
"it received positive response from film critics and audience alike."—probably plural "responses", I think. And which word should be dumped?
Could we have a rough euro or US$ equivalent in parentheses?
Highest grossing: it's a double adjective, right? Hyphen.
Probably remove "the" from the start of the list of awards.
"chiefly" is ambiguous.
"Commercially," ... isn't it redundant?

I don't know what the rest is like, and the lead is hard to write. But this is definitely not FA standard. The system is failing (failing you, the nominator) by leaving it here on the list for months and months. I'm afraid it's an Oppose. Tony (talk) 03:09, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CHECKLIST

Quality of prose throughout (1a): Insufficient. Needs auditing throughout.
High-quality, reliable sources used appropriately (1c):
Citations consistently formatted (2c):
Images/media copyright and policy compliance (3):
Comprehensive, appropriate length, neutral (1b, 4, 1d):
Follows style guidelines (2):

Comments from Mike Christie

After reading Tony's comments I just picked one section to look at: Filming and post-production. Here are some points from that section.

Principal photography for Angrej took place in the rural parts of Punjab and Rajasthan; Navneet Misser served as the film's cinematographer. I'd suggest "rural areas" rather than "the rural parts"; the "the" implies it took place in all of the rural areas of those states. Without any comment on Misser's abilities or performance it seems pointless to mention him here -- he's in the infobox. That's a minor point, but if you keep him, I'd cut "served" in favour of something more invisible, such as "was".
The scenes of the village locale were shot at -> "The village scenes were shot at".
Missing a comma before "as the production team" -- parenthetical commas have to be in pairs.
He paid particular attention to landscaping, with the production team constructing their own sets on the various shooting locations. This is not what the source says. The source has "Professional team working under Raashid worked initially on the set design. The houses, landscapes, few number of trees, streets were all created as per the story’s requirement. Raashid said, 'The love scenes are setup in the background of the village so a plain piece of land wouldn’t have served the purpose. We chose to create our own houses and other infrastructure which involved a much of hard work.' " There's nothing about giving particular attention to landscaping. Production teams construct sets, so saying they did that seems a bit pointless; it's like saying the filming was done by the camera team. Raashid's point is that the village backdrop was a set, though presumably some scenes were shot using Suratgarh as the location rather than the set, given the statement earlier in the section.
The cast and crew had also collected such property as period utensils prior to commencement of filming: The source says "the entire team looked for utensils that represented the old Punjab. 'We managed to collect a truck full of it' ". The paraphrase is inaccurate: the source only says "utensils", not "such property as utensils", which implies other things too. The source doesn't say this was completed prior to the start of filming, and given how shooting schedules often work this seems unlikely. A prose point: you're missing "the" before "commencement". Finally, I'm not even sure I would include this -- "utensils" is frustratingly unspecific so it's hard to know how to use this without giving the original wording. Perhaps the key point here is not the utensils, but the fact that the everyone involved in the film helped; phrasing that focused on that might be better. By the way, the archive link for that source seems to be damaged: when I try it I get the html source of the archive.
Costumes, which included Punjabi wedding attire, were made of khadi handloom fabric: All the costumes? Some of the costumes?
The cloth was brought Banaras, Bikaner, and Jalandhar: a word appears to be missing here.
Rangrez and his team of designers, which included Manmeet Bindra used white cloth for...: another missing parenthetical comma.
Filming for the production was done in a single schedule that lasted for around 40 days: "schedule" is not the right word here; I take it you mean there were no breaks in the schedule, so something like "in about 40 days, with no breaks in the schedule" would be better.

Oppose. This is more work to do in a single short section than I would expect at FAC. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

I'll be archiving this shortly so that the points above can be dealt with outside the FAC process, with a view to a possible re-nomination later. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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