Talk:Bhel puri/GA1

GA review

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

Nominator: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 04:46, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 19:01, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments

Interesting article on a popular Indian street food.

• No worries about copyvio on Earwig.
• Suggest wikilinking "was introduced to London" to Curry in the United Kingdom.
  • I think that would be too much of an EASTEREGG link; it would be particularly confusing to non-British readers as the word "curry" is only relevant in the British sense of a "curry house". — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 05:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
• "Madhur Jaffrey, Madhur Jaffrey's Flavours of India" - suggest dropping the first mention of the name to avoid feeling of duck-quack repetition.
  • Done.
• We are missing a section on bhel puri in literature and film/song, for instance in Breathless in Bombay, Aagadu, Coolie No. 1 (Main Toh Raste Se Ja Raha Tha Bhel Puri Kha Raha Tha).
  • None of the sources about the dish mention popular culture references (expect for a few sources that briefly address its use as a metaphor, but without elaborating much). There are some reliable sources on literature that mention depictions of the dish. However, these are all RSes about literature, not about food, so they're not relevant per WP:POPCULT. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 05:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
• Is the Dhaka dish really bhel puri or just a version of panipuri? It looks very different.
  • I was also a bit unsure when adding that statement to the article. Upon rereading the source, it describes bhelpuri as being related to phuchka and panipuri, without mentioning any connection to the Mumbai dish. I can't find any other RSes about Dhaka bhelpuri, so I've removed the statement. (I still think it's most likely that it's a variation on the same dish—there's no way the name is a coincidence—but in the absence of a source directly verifying the connection, it's best to remove it.) — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 05:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Images

• All the images are appropriate for the article. All are on Commons and plausibly licensed.
• I wonder if a small map of the Mumbai neighbourhoods mentioned wouldn't be useful? It could be quite simple.
  • That's a good idea, but I personally think the article already looks a bit crowded with images. If the sources placed greater emphasis on geography within the city, I would include a map, but based on the sourcing it's not important enough. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 05:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Sources

• All sources seem relevant and appropriate for the subject.
• I'm never sure with Sanghvi as he's very free with his opinions and seems to court controversy, but I guess he's reliable enough within reason.
  • I agree with your assessment of Sanghvi. I've added in-text attribution to Sanghvi for a few statements that are potentially disputable. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 05:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
• Refs from Trefler 2012 (2 instances), Mallapragada 2014, and Sangvhi 2004 currently do not connect to anything in 'Works cited'. The Sanghvi/Sangvhi one is because of a typo at one end. The Mallapragada is either an error in the date (2017 at other end) or it's a different book. The Trefler one ditto (2011 at other end).
  • Fixed.
• Please spell out and wikilink Colleen Taylor Sen as all the other authors have their full names.
  • Done.
• Spot-checks: [4], [25], [39].

Summary

• This is an informative and well-cited article and there's little wrong with it. I think it needs a culture section; a map would be nice but not mandatory; other than that, I have noted only a few minor points which should be quickly fixed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2025 (UTC)
  • @Chiswick Chap: I have addressed your comments. Thanks for the review. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 05:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
    • Great work! It's a GA. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:42, 23 December 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.