Talk:Murali Kartik

Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Wikipeep 494 18:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Status

I have assesed this article as meeting WP:GA status as it meets the relevant criteria, being well written, accurate and verifiable, broad, NPOV and stable. The article could be improved by the appropriate use of an image or images, however that alone should not prevent the achievement of GA status.--Mattinbgn/ ^talk 01:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, another cricket article that has bypassed all proper procedures to obtain a questionable status. I am beginning to see a pattern here. For instance, this article only contains info on his cricket achievements, but absolutely nothing on his personal life, which would seem to fail the broad coverage criterion. Errabee 23:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Murali Kartik/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment. This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there is one issue that needs to be addressed.

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

As with the recently improved Irfan Pathan article, this requires updating to include events of the last year.--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Done, very nice job too.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

Although by no means essential, an image would be very helpful for this article.--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

• a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards,--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This is now GA quality, well done.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)