Talk:International Fleet Review 2016/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 09:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments: G'day, I have the following comments for the review: AustralianRupert (talk) 09:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

• the Earwig tool reports a possible copyright violation: [1]. In this regard, I think the article requires significant reworking to remove this.
• one of the main issues that I see with the article currently is the quality of the punctuation, spelling and grammar. There are a lot of errors in this regard, to the extent that I believe it needs an extensive copy edit as there numerous issues with incorrect capitalization, missing parts of speech, incorrect punctuation and incomplete sentences;
• tense issue: "International Fleet Review 2016 is an International Maritime Exercise..." --> International Fleet Review 2016 was an International Maritime Exercise" as the event is in the past
• tense issue: "The conference is planned over two days" --> The conference was planned over two days"
• at only 900 words of readable prose, the article's coverage seems rather superficial
• additionally, the article appears to be missing context. For instance, the first section dives straight into discussing the curtain raising ceremony, but some discussion about why the event was planned, who ordered it, etc. should appear first. Additionally, some discussion about previous such events (both in India and elsewhere) should probably be discussed in the same section
• I suggest combining some of the smaller sections. For instance "Indian Naval ships" and "Participating Countries and their ships". I would also remove the two separate links and just include the one: List of ships present at International Fleet Review 2016
• Manual of Style: there are a few MOS issues, for instance date format: "06 February 2016" should be "6 February 2016"
• the Commons category template should probably be moved in accordance with WP:ELLAYOUT
• there are probably too many images in the article, and I suggest trimming some of these, especially the ones that are WP:SANDWICHING the text
• this should be referenced: "Indian Navy’s Central Band organised a concert as a part of this event at Samudrika Naval Auditorium."
• some of the references are missing publisher and accessdate details
• headings should conform with WP:Section caps
• Anyway, that is it from me for now. I will place the article on hold for seven days to see what improvements can be made before making a final decision. Thank you for your efforts so far. Regards AustralianRupert (talk) 09:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Comment The comments I made in the previous GAN about the article not providing sufficient coverage of the topic and reading like an Indian Navy press release still hold. Some of the text still lacks references, and there remain some problems with the tense of the text. Nick-D (talk) 02:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Per the comment on my talk page, I have reviewed the recent changes. While there has been significant work done, I still think there are issues to be addressed. I have tried to copy edit the article for the most glaring grammatical issues, but I think it still needs work, to be honest. I would recommend asking someone from the WP:GOCE to take a look. However, before that occurs I really think the article needs to be expanded. The coverage remains light, in my opinion, with many very short paragraphs. One of the suggestions I have in this regard is to add a Background section. Some of the information that you have in the lead about past fleet reviews, and their purpose could be added to this sort of section. I would also suggest expanding your description of some of the sections, for instance instead of just saying a press conference was held, you could discuss what was said, and the media reactions to it. Same same for the Opening ceremony section. Currently you just say it happened, but you could describe it. Some images of foreign navies would be good too as currently they all seem to be Indian ships or aircraft. There also remain a couple of areas that need citations. These have been marked with "citation needed" tags for easy of identification. I would also suggest removing the flag icons from the infobox per MOS:ICON as they are purely decorative. Finally, I'd suggest that the section labelled "Curtain raising ceremony" is not really an accurate reflection of the event. I would probably just roll this into a Background section. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:57, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok, I am going to close this article now as the issues raised above are still a concern (in the paragraph directly above this one). My suggestion have once these issues are addressed, that the article be sent through peer review before re-nominating for GA. Anyway, good luck with taking the article further. Thanks for your efforts so far. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)