Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like feedback regarding comprehensiveness, grammar and writing. I would like to see constructive comments for its further improvement required for FL.
Thanks, — Prashant 16:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
The intro seems incredibly long. It is way longer than most filmography articles I have seen, although I have not seen a great deal of them; but some have only a single sentence. Since much of it is repeated from the main article, and this is supposed to be a list, I would say that cuts are needed here. Although now looking at Wikipedia:Featured_lists, some do have a fair amount of text, but they usually do not list the earnings for many individual films. Try to emulate these. BollyJeff | talk 02:25, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Done: Removed earnings and trimmed the lead a bit.—
Prashant 03:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
My suggestion is to remove budget and gross from the filmography, because it is not really that important for her, is causing sorting problems and is incomplete anyway. You could leave director if you want, but since this is its own article now, I think it would be okay to put back notes/awards and add other awards besides Filmfare and National Awards, which is more important for her than budget etc. If you look at some Hollywood actor filmographies, they are full of other awards. Good sources are still needed though. BollyJeff | talk 14:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Then you'll say to not include sales of albums/singles in her Discography article (hopefully one day will be created) Right? Because there are no such articles on Indian artists. I think it's fine to have budget and gross and By the way all sources are reputed and notable. For her awards, there is an another article.— Prashant 22:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll put some thoughts in here over the next day or so. It's in pretty good shape, but needs work in a few key areas. The ones I raised at the previous FLC were:
More to follow shortly. - SchroCat ( talk) 14:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
The lead is still way too wordy and bloated. I've done four complete career histories of British actors involving their stage, TV, film, radio and record outputs, all for actors who had a literal lifetime of professional work of over 50 years each; all the lists are FLCs. The word count on their leads are:
I've also done David Niven on screen, stage, radio, record and in print (currently an FL candidate) which has a 364 word lead. In comparison, Chopra rolls in at a whopping 724 words for a film career that has only been going twelve years. Have a look at the leads on the five articles I've listed and see how they are structured and what they are describing. The Chopra lead could lose a couple of hundred words and be better for the readers to understand the career to date. - SchroCat ( talk) 07:54, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Done: Trimmed a bit. But, FYI I have developed the article on the lines of
Christian Bale filmography (an FL and has a long prose).—
Prashant 14:38, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Tables now OK, I think, but I'll give them another going over at FLC In terms of the text:
I'm still not happy about the lead, but I'm not entirely sure why. I'll have another look later - probably at FLC again. - SchroCat ( talk) 05:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to Schrod this was already much improved. I've made a number of edits myself and have condensed it down to a length which I think flows better and covers what needs to be covered. In my opinion this is now just about ready.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
I think those edits are very good and the article has improved a lot. Thanks.— Prashant 17:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
I think the recent work on the lead makes it much better; it's tighter, easier to read but still covers everything that needs sorting. I suggest you close the PR and go to FLC. A quick note, Prashant: if you ask people on their talk pages to come to FLC, only ask once and do not chase or remind them, as you did to Cassianto. That will only ever backfire on you and you will lose reviewers. - SchroCat ( talk) 23:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I got it. Thanks. — Prashant 02:45, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank You everyone, who participated in the PR and the article has improved significantly.— Prashant 02:45, 6 August 2013 (UTC)