Talk:Bipasha Basu/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vensatry (talk · contribs) 11:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

• I'll be reviewing this article. Will start the process shortly. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 11:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Initial comments

The following facts needs sources

• "Basu was born in Bengali Hindu family. She is the second of three sisters, the elder one being Bidisha and the younger one, Bijayeta" is not verified by the source.
• Same for "she studied science till 12th standard at Bhavan's Gangabux Kanoria Vidyamandir".
• "She then appeared in the Calida commercial along with her then-boyfriend Dino Morea which was controversial for picturising them sultrily"
• In the first para of "Debut and Breakthrough (2001–02)" first few lines are unsourced even though the source that you've added at the end of the para verifies it. Add proper inline citation for each sentence.
• She then appeared in supporting roles in Sanjay Gadhvi’s Mere Yaar Ki Shaadi Hai and David Dhawan’s Chor Machaaye Shor, both of which failed critically and commercially. She also appeared in a supporting role opposite Mahesh Babu and Lisa Ray in the Telugu film, Takkari Donga as a mischievous thief, Panasa.
• She received a Filmfare Best Villain Award nomination for Jism.
• She essayed the role of seductive, ambitious wife of a millionaire who indulges in an extra-marital affair with an alcoholic lawyer and plots to kill her husband.
• She was nominated for the second time for Filmfare Best Actress Award.
• Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal performed below average at the box-office
• "The film grossed 68 crores at the box office and was the fourth-biggest hit that year in India and performed good enough overseas as well". Source does not verify it.
• Earned her a second nomination for Filmfare Best Supporting Actress Award.

Prose

• Something more about the modeling career of this super model?
• Italicize "The Times of India" in the second para of "Success".

References

• Sources like "movietalkies.com" and "Bengal Spider" doesn't look reliable for me.
• Refs#61, #83 use bare URLs.
• Refs #33, #62 and a few others are incomplete, missing vital parameters.

The article looks good otherwise. I'll place on hold for now and it shouldn't take much time to fix these issues. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 12:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I request for some time to fix these issues. Due to my busy schedule, I couldn't rectify within seven days. Srinivas 17:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Final analysis

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Lead does not adequately summarize the article.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   A few unsourced claims and references not supporting the text. I can see a few sentences with copyvio/close paraphrasing.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article focuses only on her film career and does not talk much about her modelling career, personal life. Also other work such as Philanthropy, if any, could be included.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are properly tagged as such but the image in her "Personal life" section seems irrelevant to me.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   The article is not complete in terms of coverage and needs some additional work before it can be renominated. It's been two weeks since the start of the review and see no major improvements in the article. I don't think the article will be benefited by giving extra time to handle the issues.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you're not satisfied with this review, you may take it to Good article reassessment.
—Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 08:32, 21 June 2012 (UTC)