Talk:Lakshadweep/GA2

GA Review

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

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 15:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Ajay Platinum (talk · contribs) 17:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article. Feel free to push back against anything you disagree with - very few, if any, of the things I'll mention will individually be worth a GA fail on their own. Any changes too minor to bother you with, I'll just do directly in the article - but feel free to revert or question any of those as well.

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Barring minor punctuation and grammatical issues, the article reads well. I'll correct these minor issues while reviewing. Well-structured and in line with Wiki standards. Appreciate the informative table used for the list of islands. I have some notes/suggestions:
   (1) A sentence should preferably follow a single line of thought. For instance, when listing the three island sub-groups, adding their geographic separators may create confusing sentences. You can use parentheses or a new sentence to break up the information. This makes long articles easier to read.
   (2) Consistent spelling. I understand that words in a non-English script can be difficult to anglicize in articles, especially when they don't have a standard. However, try to pick one spelling and stick with it for the entire article. For instance, Kolathiri and Kolattiri may be the same word, but both spellings are used in this article, leading to possible confusion for readers not familiar with the subject.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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:

   Neutral tone and unbiased content. Sticks to the facts and does not jump to conclusions. Well written.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   On hold because user:Tera Ranjit Punjabi and 2 anonymous IPs have forcefully reverted incorrect edits to this article in the last month (October 2024), and were on the verge of violating the WP:3RR rule. While there is no edit war as per the Wiki definition, I recommend waiting an additional 7 days to confirm that this article is stable. If all is well, the status shall be changed to Pass.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   All images have appropriate tags, are free-use (from Commons), and the captions are suitable. Good selection of images to showcase the biodiversity.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Ajay Platinum (talk) 17:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)