Hello Paavamjinn, I'll take up the review for this nomination and will present it to you shortly. I hope you find my feedback helpful. Tayi ArajakateTalk 00:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paavamjinn, sorry for the delayed review. I've gone through the article now and I should say this looks like a premature nomination, quite a bit of work is necessary before it can be promoted. See the points below and feel free to ask me if you have any queries or objections. If you want, I can put this review on hold for the time being or I can fail it now so that you can get more time to work on it. Tayi ArajakateTalk 18:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tayi Arajakate, how many days can this put this review on hold. Currently, I am busy with my PhD program. I need more time for this exactly I can as 1 or 2 months. Also "Ref 131 is a dead link to an questionable source" what this point means? Can you hold it for 2 months? Also please specify about the primary source to be reduced. What does that meanPaavamjinn (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paavamjinn, that's a bit long but I suppose I can put this on hold for two months, I won't any longer though so consider that the deadline (10 July). I've also fixed the "ref 131" point and specified what I'm referring to. Regarding primary sources, read WP:PRIMARY; in this case it's sources such as any television channel he has worked for, any movie listing on a website (which are generally derived from the movie's press releases), an award granter's own website, Mammootty own website, the website of any NGO that he is worked for, etc. The issue with the use of primary source in the article is that they don't help determine due weight, for example Mammootty has received a lot of awards throughout his career but if some award from a minor function is not mentioned in independent news coverage at all then it wouldn't have sufficient weight for inclusion in contrast to say major awards which are widely covered. Tayi ArajakateTalk 08:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
The primary issue with the article is that it's not comprehensive. The entire section on acting career is not much more than a list of films in sentence form. It can be significantly expanded and needs to include his career progression, i.e his roles, the reception of his performances, the significance of any particular film, etc. Please take a look at other GA class or FA class articles, for example Shah Rukh Khan.
The article has an over-reliance on primary sources in certain areas which needs to be replaced or supported by secondary ones. For instance the entirety of the part regarding Pain and Palliative Care Society is sourced to the organisation's website itself.
Lot of the sections are a disjoint group of factoids. For instance his films on other languages should be in chronological order in his acting career itself, it should describe how he came to star in a non-Malayalam film, etc. Another would be the one on him, Mohanlal and Dileep accounting for 97% of the box-office revenue of Malayalam cinema which is followed by a number of unrelated things. Is there nothing more one can be said about it?
The lead doesn't necessarily need citations as long as the same material is sourced in the body, see WP:LEADCITE. The lead itself is problematic however. For example, the second paragraph is a list of the ffilms he debuted in, in various industries and almost entirely skips his work in the Malayalam industry, consider that the lead should highlight the most significant aspects of the subject. It'll need a re-write after the article is expanded.
Lines such as "His acting and contributions to Malayalam cinema have been praised by his contemporaries in the Indian film industry." are superfluous and don't add much, instead the article should document what praise he received, from whom did he receive it, when did he receive it, including review commentaries of his performance, how it has evolved over the years, etc.
Many of the images are marked as own work but they don't appear to be so, please ensure all pictures used are copyright compliant.
The article at present uses a number of poor sources.