Mouna Ragam received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mouna Ragam article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Mouna Ragam has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
February 8, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
Mouna Ragam was the first
Mani Ratnam film to use
staccato dialogue? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld ( talk · contribs) 12:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Will review within a few days.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
"Revathi and Mohan's performances were also praised." -not needed
The film and cast were critically acclaimed should suffice.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:33, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Outsider's comment
Vensatry How are we doing?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:04, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
The prose seems to have been improved a bit but for me the neutrality is now the biggest issue. The music, reception and legacy sections I don't think you could call neutral.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Krimuk90 Can you see what I mean in the music, reception and legacy sections about the neutrality? Any ideas of how to deal with it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy New Year all. Yes. some good points I think if you could find a bit and dial down the praise a little it should be OK. Let me know when you think it's done and I'll take another look.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Dr. Blofeld, Kailash29792, Vensatry, Krimuk90: Happy New Year to everyone! Thamizhan1994 ( Appo Pesu) 09:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
@ Kailash29792: I have addressed Vensatry's comment on Karthik featuring in a guest role. Thamizhan1994 ( Appo Pesu) 09:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Good job Tham, reads much better than it did now. If in the future you can try to ensure it's a neutral as possible before nomming and fully copyedited it's likely to pass a lot quicker!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
I had planned to take this article to FA at one point. But now that I've lost my mojo, and I've had consecutive FAC failures, I'm scrapping those plans for this. Instead, I want to see that this article is still at least GA-worthy, since five years have passed since it was promoted to GA and it has been substantially edited in that time period. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Just had a quick look at it and it easily looks a GA. Not sure what you're worried about.† Encyclopædius 11:12, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Mouna Ragam received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mouna Ragam article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Mouna Ragam has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
February 8, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
Mouna Ragam was the first
Mani Ratnam film to use
staccato dialogue? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld ( talk · contribs) 12:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Will review within a few days.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
"Revathi and Mohan's performances were also praised." -not needed
The film and cast were critically acclaimed should suffice.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:33, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Outsider's comment
Vensatry How are we doing?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:04, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
The prose seems to have been improved a bit but for me the neutrality is now the biggest issue. The music, reception and legacy sections I don't think you could call neutral.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Krimuk90 Can you see what I mean in the music, reception and legacy sections about the neutrality? Any ideas of how to deal with it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy New Year all. Yes. some good points I think if you could find a bit and dial down the praise a little it should be OK. Let me know when you think it's done and I'll take another look.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Dr. Blofeld, Kailash29792, Vensatry, Krimuk90: Happy New Year to everyone! Thamizhan1994 ( Appo Pesu) 09:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
@ Kailash29792: I have addressed Vensatry's comment on Karthik featuring in a guest role. Thamizhan1994 ( Appo Pesu) 09:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Good job Tham, reads much better than it did now. If in the future you can try to ensure it's a neutral as possible before nomming and fully copyedited it's likely to pass a lot quicker!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
I had planned to take this article to FA at one point. But now that I've lost my mojo, and I've had consecutive FAC failures, I'm scrapping those plans for this. Instead, I want to see that this article is still at least GA-worthy, since five years have passed since it was promoted to GA and it has been substantially edited in that time period. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Just had a quick look at it and it easily looks a GA. Not sure what you're worried about.† Encyclopædius 11:12, 27 April 2020 (UTC)