Talk:Happy Bhag Jayegi

Happy Bhag Jayegi 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: February 2, 2018. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: Indian 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 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).

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

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 09:42, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 09:42, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• "as the eponymous heroine Happy" — Just "as Happy" would do.
• "bride to be" should be "bride-to-be"
• Saurabh Goswami is mentioned as the cinematographer in the lead but not in the infobox. Please do so.
• Best to remove the names of the cast members in the plot section.
• "who decides to arrange for her deportation." — Can be rephrased as "who in turn decides to arrange for her deportation."
• "Happy blackmails Bilal into helping her by using a contrived story accusing him and his father of human trafficking." — sounds a bit vague. Be a little more clearer on this.
• "who initially suspects him of having an affair with Happy." — The plot doesn't explain when Zoya has a change of heart about her perception of Happy and Bilal having an affair.
• "Bagga later realises the fraud as he helplessly" — Rephrase it as "Bagga later realises the sham when he helplessly"
• "whispers something in the latter's ear" — Is it revealed later what it was? If not, it doesn't seem to be relevant enough.

It's similar to what happens at the end of Lost in Translation; it is an important detail because it is left to the viewers to interpret the scene in any possible way.

• "It was Rai's first venture as a producer" — If this was his first venture then you can add a footnote about how Nil Battey Sannata released earlier.
• Wikilink romantic drama.
• "The former felt that the album had an "interesting mix of different styles" and dubbed it "memorable" in his review three and a half out if half star review for The Times of India." — Rephrase it as "The former, writing for The Times of India, gave the album three and a half out of five stars and felt that it had an "interesting mix of different styles" and dubbed it "memorable"."
• Wikilink "salwar kamiz" and "pathani".

done; pathani suit has already been linked in the artcile.

• Where's the source/URL for Masand's review?
• "The performances of majority of the cast were well received by film critics." — Source?
• "The performances of majority of the cast were well received by film critics. Penty was variously dubbed as "brimming with potential" and a "misfit"." — you can say it simply as "The performances of majority of the cast were well received by film critics, who dubbed Penty as "brimming with potential" and a "misfit"."

Since the second part is a mixed reaction, I'd rather keeo them separate.

Once these comments are addressed, Numerounovedant, then I'll promote this article.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 09:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up the review Ssven2, I have hopefully addressed all your comments. VedantTalk 10:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. 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:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.

   Pass or Fail:

The sources are good too. Nice work on the article, Numerounovedant.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 14:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]