From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b ( MoS):
    I would like to see the lead somewhat longer, and better summarize the article. At minimum, the biography and worship should be mentioned in a lot greater detail. The lead can be twice the current length if possible. There are a number of one- (or two-) sentence paragraphs. These should be merged with other paragraphs. I believe I have addressed this issue through my copyedit—that also fixed the MoS errors. Take a look at the diff of my edit to learn some systematic errors; these included quotes in italics, mixing of BCE/CD and BC/AD (choose one), forced image size, use of a hyphen (-) instead of an emdash (—) for punctuation, and the odd capitalization. Under the performing section, this sentence in uncomprehensable: "Kathak dancer, Shovana Narayan explores Lucknow gharana of Kathak has several performances based on Krishna's life."
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):
    Not all the references are properly wrapped into {{ cite}} templates.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    I believe the matters discussed on the talk page have been addressed.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    A comprehenisve and interesting article; if fixed to match the comments on the lead, the performing arts and the cite template it should pass GA. Arsenikk (talk) 16:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the references, will take atleast 3 days to rectify.-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 16:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Removed "Kathak dancer, Shovana Narayan explores Lucknow gharana of Kathak has several performances based on Krishna's life." as UNDUE to the artist. -- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 04:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Templates cite book, cite web, cite journal used.-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 05:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
expanded lead, biography is covered by "a god-child, a prankster, a model lover, a divine hero and the Supreme Being."-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 06:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Great :) Congratulations with a Good Article! Arsenikk (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Thanks.-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 13:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b ( MoS):
    I would like to see the lead somewhat longer, and better summarize the article. At minimum, the biography and worship should be mentioned in a lot greater detail. The lead can be twice the current length if possible. There are a number of one- (or two-) sentence paragraphs. These should be merged with other paragraphs. I believe I have addressed this issue through my copyedit—that also fixed the MoS errors. Take a look at the diff of my edit to learn some systematic errors; these included quotes in italics, mixing of BCE/CD and BC/AD (choose one), forced image size, use of a hyphen (-) instead of an emdash (—) for punctuation, and the odd capitalization. Under the performing section, this sentence in uncomprehensable: "Kathak dancer, Shovana Narayan explores Lucknow gharana of Kathak has several performances based on Krishna's life."
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):
    Not all the references are properly wrapped into {{ cite}} templates.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    I believe the matters discussed on the talk page have been addressed.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    A comprehenisve and interesting article; if fixed to match the comments on the lead, the performing arts and the cite template it should pass GA. Arsenikk (talk) 16:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the references, will take atleast 3 days to rectify.-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 16:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Removed "Kathak dancer, Shovana Narayan explores Lucknow gharana of Kathak has several performances based on Krishna's life." as UNDUE to the artist. -- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 04:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Templates cite book, cite web, cite journal used.-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 05:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
expanded lead, biography is covered by "a god-child, a prankster, a model lover, a divine hero and the Supreme Being."-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 06:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Great :) Congratulations with a Good Article! Arsenikk (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Thanks.-- Redtigerxyz ( talk) 13:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook