Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Kalki Koechlin/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kalki Koechlin

[edit]
Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because the article needs a copy-edit for FA standard writing style and a prose check. Thanks. NumerounovedantTalk 20:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there was nothing excessively wrong with the prose until all the additions. I must say it has really worsened and will need a good copy-edit from someone experienced. Here is a comment to be getting on with:

  • The early life section seems rather short. Try to do some research and see if you can add some more information.

Will add some more comments later. ツ FrB.TG (talk) 09:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand your concerns, but I also believe that with all the new additions the article now gives a better insight on Koechlin's career and her personality. It will also be a more engaging read after the copy-edit. I think this would lift the article as a whole. Thank you for the your work you've put into this though! NumerounovedantTalk 17:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG: I did some digging and found some more information on her early life and have added it to the section. Take a look whenever you find time. Thanks! NumerounovedantTalk 13:12, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait for a GOCE member to copy-edit the article before I post my comments here. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 03:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Thanks! NumerounovedantTalk 13:06, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanamonde93: Thank you for sharing the piece of information! NumerounovedantTalk 13:12, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from JM

[edit]
  • Is the current side-on infobox image ideal?
  • Could you check the audio file on the first line?
  • Fixed
  • "top-grossing Bollywood productions both of which earned her Best Supporting Actress nominations at Filmfare" THis is clumsy. You could consider splitting it off into a separate sentence: "These were top-grossing Bollywood productions, and both earned her Best Supporting Actress nominations at the Filmfare Awards [or whatever the full name of the awards would be]".
  • Is Waiting 2015 or 2016?
  • There's no mention of the elder brother until she moves in with him; or do you mean the half-brother?
  • What's an "MMS scandal"?
  • "Koechlin too received praise for her performance of which Anupama Chopra wrote: "...Kalki who is an intriguing actor but perhaps not experienced enough to pull off the complexity of her character"." Clumsy
  • "The film received positive reviews from critics" What's your source for this?
  • "Akhtar, in an interview with NDTV, expressed her wish to work with Koechlin since she saw her in Dev.D and the then-unreleased That Girl in Yellow Boots." This could be smoothed
  • "Koechlin was often offered 'dark' roles like those of prostitutes, troubled teenagers, and misfits" Your source for this? Who are you quoting, and why the single quotes?
  • "Consequently, when she was offered a comic role, she was really keen on doing it, because it was different to her previous work." Informal
Fixed all of the above (hopefully)
  • "In an interview with Rediff, Koechlin revealed that she took diction classes in order to improve her Hindi for the film." How important is this?
I think it is important because Koechlin is not a native speaker of Hindi language and this is her first significant role where she had Hindi dialogues.
Ok, but why not simplifying to something like "Koechlin took diction classes in order to improve her Hindi for the film." Josh Milburn (talk) 17:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah sound good! NumerounovedantTalk 17:42, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Rajeev Masand of CNN-IBN wrote: "Kalki Koechlin, playing what is essentially a caricature, keeps her character grounded in the real"[26" Again, so what? Also, check your punctuation.
Removed
  • "beyond the obvious" What's obvious?
Fixed
  • "Box Office India criticised the production, but thought that Koechlin brought credibility to role and did it "justice".[37][39][40]" A bit of a weird quote. It's also odd to talk about Koechlin's view of the character when you haven't even introduced the character.
  • Who am I looking at on the group shot?
  • "The film opened to mixed reviews" What's your source for this? Is it mentioned in the article about the flops?
  • "video met with rave reviews from critics" Informal
  • I'm a bit surprised at the separation of the theatre work from the "career" section; it's surely all part of her career. Perhaps you could specify that you're writing about her film career in the first section, or else merge the two sections. I think merging them would be better; there seems to be a moderate amount of repetition.
  • I'm not sure I see the value of the "everyone has doubts" quote.
  • I think "outspoken" is a little judgemental.
  • "Koechlin has also presented numerous monologues on pressing social matters at different events." This is very weaselly. Is "monologue" really the right word for what you're talking about, here?
  • I think the media image section is a good bit too long. At the very least, you could trim a few quotes
  • "Her wide-eyed ingenue and bee stung lips have been cited by Rediff.com as her distinctive physical features" Inappropriate tone.

Hope this is useful. This still feels a bit short of FA-level, but it's certainly not a bad article. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:04, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Working on the rest. Thanks again :) NumerounovedantTalk 11:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

comments from Yash

[edit]
  • Restore the earlier infobox image. It was of high quality with a better view of her face. We can't see her full face in the current one.
  • I am sure "Dev.D" is not a "comedy".
fixed
  • Ref 35 is redundant.
removed
  • "She was married to the filmaker.." Remove "the" and the comma after "filmmaker".
    • I'm inclined to disagree with this, if you're talking about the line at the end of the lead. Right now, the sentence reads "She was married to the filmmaker Anurag Kashyap from 2011 to 2015." This is grammatically correct. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I second Josh here.
  • Wikilink Komal Nahta.
done
  • "Koechlin portrayed a young political activist". Its not a author-backed role where she is playing a real life character. Replace "portrayed" and also remove "young", sounds like a fluff.
how is "young" fluff?
She is young and that's pretty visible for everyone. Even if its not fluff, it is borderline banal. Also you haven't even replaced the word "portrayed".
Yes okay done.
  • The witchcraft bit has been removed from "Ek Thi Daayan". I'd suggest you to restore that, its essential IMO.
still there
No its not.
it says Koechlin's character is suspected of witchcraft, do you the previous version worked better?
It's upto you now.
  • The fact that "Shanghai" was a critical acclaim is not supported by a source. There are only 2-3 reviews.
Added another
Still not fixed. You need to provide a source that says Shanghai was a critical success, 3-4 positive reviews doesn't justify that.
will look for something or just removed the piece
  • "Box Office India criticised the production..". Then why there are two extra references for Bollywood Hungama and NDTV?
shifted reference

Seconding Frankie, the article has indeed worsened and still there are few issues with the prose. I'll leave that to GOCE and other editors. Also there are issues of WP:QUOTEFARM. Again, good luck. Yashthepunisher (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And again I stand by the fact that is the article is way broader in coverage than it was earlier. Thank you all your suggestions! NumerounovedantTalk 10:39, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is pretty much evident how the article is "way broader in coverage" than before. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments. They have helped this article from the start. All your help is appreciated! One last thing, would the new Infobox image work? NumerounovedantTalk 13:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The current image is good. Yashthepunisher (talk) 14:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Krimuk90

[edit]

Much, much better after the GOCE copy-edits. Some other comments:

  • A word of advice regarding the images used in the article. I think they are generally of poor-quality and haven't been cropped well. The display picture is especially jarring. There are several better images to chose from IMO. I can take a look if you are okay with that?
I am open to discussion here
Changed
  • What's "screenwriting scripting"?
that was during the ce I believe it means she expanded her career by "scripting" the film?
  • "She was brought up in a strict environment". Do you mean in a conservative family?
not exactly conservative, her parents were open minded but wanted her focus on studies
  • She studied "drama and theatre". Do you know what her exact course was?
nope
  • "stint" is quite informal. Please rephrase.
done
  • What was her role in The Film Emotional Atyachar? The reviews don't make much sense if we don't know what she played in it.
added
  • "In an interview with NDTV, Akhtar expressed her wish to work with Koechlin since she saw her in Dev.D and the then-unreleased That Girl in Yellow Boots." The interview with NDTV bit doesn't add anything of substance. Also, tweak "wish to work with Koechlin since she saw her in Dev.D" to "wish to work with Koechlin after seeing her in.."
done
  • "South Bombay girl"? What's the significance of this?
it is like upper and lower Manhattan (uptown/downtown), south Mumbai is the posh areas inhabited by the wealthy people. But I agree it might not be the most important thing
  • "In an interview with Hindustan Times Koechlin revealed that she was keen to do the film, because it was different from her previous work. She said that after working in films like Dev.D and Shaitan, she feared being typecast in dark roles like prostitutes, troubled teenagers, and misfits." Sentences can be merged together, and trimmed to remove redundant info.
done
  • Why is That Girl in Yellow Boots not wikilinked in its first occurrence in the body?
it is in the previous paragraph
  • "..which she co-wrote with Kashyap, and she starred opposite Naseeruddin Shah." Grammar.
fixed
  • "Koechlin said that Kashyap was looking for a woman's perspective for the story, and so he asked her to write the script" Please tweak.
  • Not sure why star ratings by a critic needs to be mentioned? Instead, say a little bit more of what they thought of the film.
removed
  • "Koechlin described her character in the film as innocent and naïve." You can simply say that she played a naive, aspiring dancer in the film.
done
  • Better to not cite Koimoi as its reliability is under question.
  • "The two were seen posing together for cameras at various promotional events for the film" How is that relevant?
removed
  • "Rajeev Masand, writing for CNN-IBN, deemed the cast terrific, saying that:" Why a ":" instead of a ","? Similar issues in the rest of the article.
done in the ce?
  • What's "maiden production"?
removed
  • "She credited her performance in Yeh Jawani Hai Deewani for landing her the role. She said that people noticed her comic timing in the film, and that worked in her favour" Another example of the rambling prose. You can combine these two sentences.
fixed
  • "Margarita with a Straw released in India on 17 April 2015 ". That's redundant in actor's bio.
removed
  • "Koechlin won The Best Actress Award at The Tallinn Black Nights Film Festival, Screen Award for Best Actress (Jury), and garnered a nomination for the Best Actress Award at the Asian Film Awards.[76][77] She then went on to win the Jury Award at the 63rd National Film Awards.[78]". Again, the two sentences can be combined.
fixed
  • "The series premiered on 29 September". Again, TMI.
fixed
  • Waiting is not an upcoming project. It just hasn't released theatrically.
fixed
  • "Koechlin and Chadda play women of the same name who are initially strangers and then embark on a road trip holiday" ==> "Koechlin and Chadda play strangers of the name same who embark on a road trip together"
done
  • Why are her stage roles mentioned in a separate sub-section, when they can be very well merged with the rest of her career?
You may want to see this. Again, open to discussion
  • "Her mother wanted her to complete her studies before venturing into an acting career and, at her insistence, Koechlin went to London to study drama and theatre at the Goldsmiths, University of London". Han't all this already been mentioned in the prior section?
not really, trimmed though
  • "After returning to India, Koechlin moved to Mumbai to do theatre with Atul Kumar, the founder of a Mumbai-based theatre company called "The Company Theatre"" Again, repeated info.
It's important to mention the company name which wasn't mentioned earlier
  • Why is 'Little Productions' in quotes?
fixed
  • " On 19 May 2015, Kashyap and Koechlin arrived together ". I have previously mentioned this before at the FAC. Why is this important?
  • What is the big quote about her "doubts" about? You haven't provided any context to such a massive quote.
it was discussed during the FAC, the quote reflects on her mentality and her personality
  • Why is P & G in italics?
fixed
  • Malini Chib is wikilinked twice.
fixed
  • She also addressed the gender pay-gap issue saying that "equal pay won't happen", because Bollywood is a "hero-based industry". Ehmm... please tweak.
something wrong with the structure or the content?

Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:50, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Left Comments. Thanks NumerounovedantTalk 10:11, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I sense a bit of hostility from your part, so I'm going to wish you luck and stay away from this. Cheers! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 10:06, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review from SNUGGUMS

[edit]

There are thankfully no copyright concerns. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into the issues, thank you for the review! NumerounovedantTalk 07:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from IndianBio
@IndianBio: Hey thanks for sharing your comments! Any suggestions? NumerounovedantTalk 10:31, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Plenty actually. The following are what I got from commons. 1, 2, 3, extremely good if cropped just a few. —IB [ Poke ] 14:02, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the suggestions! NumerounovedantTalk 19:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced! NumerounovedantTalk 09:25, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you everyone for participating in the Peer Review! NumerounovedantTalk 16:04, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Kalki_Koechlin/archive2&oldid=1140158856"