Talk:Bhale Bhale Magadivoy

Bhale Bhale Magadivoy 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.
Review: December 7, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Film: Indian

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

India: Cinema Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Corinne, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 29 November 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bhale Bhale Magadivoy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 13:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'll review this article. Thank you. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
Pass or Fail:

@Pavanjandhyala: Don't see any major issues with it. A neat, little article that passes the GA criteria. Congratulations yet again, Pavan!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for reviewing the article, Ssven2! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:39, 7 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Add topic