Talk:Devika Rani

First sound film?

This article mentions that Karma of 1929 is the first Indian sound movie. However, to the best of my knowledge, Alam Ara is the first Indian and hindi talkie. Or is it that Alam Ara is the first full-length talkie while Karma has few places where a soundtrack is available? Some one may please look into the matter. --Gurubrahma 16:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Removed WikiProject Classical music

Although she got a scholarship to study at the Royal Academy of Music to study acting and music, she didn't make a career in classical music, and is hardly of interest to that Wikiproject. --Stfg (talk) 12:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Questions

• The lead says "M. N. Chaudhuri, India's first surgeon-general", the early life says "was the first Indian Surgeon-General of Madras". Which one is correct?
  • Corrected —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• "She got admissions from the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art (RADA) and the Royal Academy of Music in London to study acting and music" Is that a correct construction? "She got admissions"?
  • Done —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• "Impressed with her, Rai persuaded Devika Rani to join his production team to which she readily agreed." Kind of vague. Impressed with her what? Looks, singing? If source does not mention anything specific, then it may be ok.
  • The source says "exceptional skills". Added the same in quotes —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• "Shortly after the release of the film, she married Rai in 1929. The couple went to Germany for the post-production work," Th epost-production of Throw of Dice? But it was already released.
  • Corrected —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• "to witness the making of films of German film-makers" clumsy construction.
  • Done I think —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• "Known to be the longest such scene for a film in Indian cinema, it lasted for about four minutes" Longest, as of which year?--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Added —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• Is it Sasadhar Mukherjee who brought Devika Rani back after he eloping? Or, is it Rai himself? Bollywood's top 20 book, and probably the obituary also mentions Rai doing the act of bringing her back.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:09, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
  • The obituary only says Rai agreed to take her back. Bollywood's top 20 mentions that the claim was according to Niranjan Pal. I can find quite a good number of sources mentioning that Mukherjee was the one who brought back her, The Pioneer, The Illustrated Weekly of India Ashok Kumar's authorized biography to name a few. It was at this time Ashok Kumar made his debut after Mukherjee recommended his name. —Vensatry _(ping) 18:26, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

@Dwaipayanc: It seems you have tagged the sentence "In an interview to journalist Raju Bharatan ... " with {{when}}. To my knowledge, the source doesn't mention any date. —Vensatry _(ping) 18:42, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dwaipayanc (talk · contribs) 21:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

• Added some comments in the article talk page. The article has, especially in the second half, several grammar errors. I may correct them as I do my second reading.--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for taking up this review. —Vensatry _(Ping) 05:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• I know this is difficult: did you find any commentary on her acting style etc? --Dwaipayan (talk) 13:26, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Except for some "flowery phrases" (like the ones mentioned by Sarojini Naidu and one more from Nehru) I cannot find anything on her acting style. —Vensatry _(ping) 17:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
• I see that several sources call her as "Fist Lady of Indian screen" rather than first leading lady. IMO that should be included.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done —Vensatry _(ping) 05:35, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

• Update the article already meets GA criteria 2 through 6. I have not yet read the lead section. After reading the lead, and perhaps one more read of the article overall, I'd provide my opinion on criterion 1, and wrap things up. However, this may take a few days.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:49, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review thus far. Looking forward to the rest —Vensatry _(ping) 17:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
• I have done significant copyedit in lead. Please see if you agree. Also used debutant instead of debutante. Please arrange categories alphabetically.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:13, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the copy-edits. I've made a few changes but minor ones. Agree with you on the usage of "debutant". As for the categories, is it a requirement for them to be sorted alphabetically? —Vensatry _(ping) 07:13, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
    • No, sorting the cats in alpha order is NOT a GA requirement. And it won't prevent achieving GA status. --Dwaipayan (talk) 18:35, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
• Lead says, "At the peak of her career in 1945, she married Russian painter Svetoslav Roerich and retired from films", but her last acting role was in 1943, and I am not sure if her role as producer should be included in "peak of career". So, I am unsure if 1945 was really peak of her career. I have no other alternative sentence suggestion at this moment.--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Yeah, there was a slight misinterpretation. I've made a small c/e. Please see if it looks good. —Vensatry _(ping) 05:22, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion, this article meets GA criteria.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Dwaipayanc for the detailed review. —Vensatry _(ping) 06:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Possible sources? Randomly collected

• page 270 and 271
• page 217
• page 169
• dragon lady!
• first English song?--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:36, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the sources. I was knowing about the bi-lingual song, but somehow missed that. —Vensatry _(ping) 18:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

So much for "good faith"

At 22:28 just now, I made an edit which looks like and said that I have provided sources for the change. Exactly one minute later, at 22:29, User:TheRedPenOfDoom reverted my edit with the summary "good faith, but not a reliable source." I am sure that he did not even have time to IDENTIFY what source I had provided, leave aside being able to assess whether it was a "reliable source" or not. So much for "good faith."

Please note that the source is quite reliable and nothing remotely derogatory or excessively laudatory has been said about the Devika Rani. Therefore please let other people contribute to this page. Please do not revert again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.128.152 (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Random websites are not "reliable sources with a reputation for fact checking, accuracy and editorial oversight. " If you wish to make your case, you will need to go to the reliable source notice board. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Not a "random website" but an Australian university and a long-term academic project, here are the sources THEY have used: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.128.152 (talk) 23:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Article review

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and saw lots of uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 22:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Devika Rani

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Uncited statements, including the first two paragraphs of the "Elopement" section. Z1720 (talk) 19:59, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.