Talk:Murshid Quli Khan/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Neil916 (talk · contribs) 17:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I am Neil916 and I will be reviewing this article.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Significant prose issues remain in this article. Several gramattical errors and some major problems with the use of pronouns make the article confusing and difficult to follow. As just one illustrative example, read the "Conflict with Azim-us-Shan" section. You have three men identified in the first two sentences of the paragraph. The next sentence reads, "He was not pleased at his appointment as he intend to use the revenue collected from the state to fund his campaign to occupy the Mughal throne after Aurangzeb's death." Who does "he" refer to? Who was not pleased at whose appointment? The rest of the article contains several instances where the reader is left wondering who "he" is referring to. The second sentence of the "Assassination attempt" section illustrates one of many simple grammatical mistakes in the article, "Taking the advantage of the unpaid soldiers, he brainwashed them then Quli Khan was responsible for the due of their salaries." These mistakes make the article very difficult to follow. I am unable to evaluate the text for copyright issues since all sources are offline.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The lead does not adequately provide a simple summary of the article. Think of the lead as something I'll glance at if this article is wikilinked from another article and I want to glance here to get some context of how it is used in the original article. For example, in the first paragraph, there is a link to Nawab of Bengal. I don't know what a Nawab is, so I quickly checked that link and was able to tell just from the first few sentences of that article what a Nawab was. If I want to read a detailed history of the Nawabs of Bengal, then it's there to dive into, but in this case, I just wanted to glance at the lead and go back to this article. The lead of the article should quickly answer the questions of "who was this guy, when did he live, and why was he important? Was he controversial?" so I can go back where I came, or I can dive in deeper.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	In-line sources are provided, with page numbers from where they are sourced. Sources listed include ISBN numbers but do not include publisher, publisher location, and year. Please update with this information.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	References that are used appear to be reliable sources.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Statements are attributed to their sources throughout the article. Sources are offline, so the major editors should verify that the sources actually state what the article attributes to them, but page numbers have been provided, which should make this easy to do if there are disputed facts in the future.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Life, death, some major accomplishments during his reign indicating his importance are included. No major comprehensiveness issues found. However, some additional descriptions or wikilinks to subjects that are unfamiliar to a reader need to be included. What is a "Diwan"? What is a "Mughal" or a "Mughal emperor"? Where is "Mukshusabad"? Don't overlink, but make it easier for a reader to gain some context of potentially unfamiliar items mentioned in the article.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article does not get significantly distracted from the main topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is neutral and historical controversies are indicated.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	There are no recent challenges to the article's content.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	No image copyright issues
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are relevant. Some maps may be helpful additions to illustrate the geography that is described in the text for readers who are unfamiliar with the area.
	7. Overall assessment.	Prose and article flow issues are significant and require substantial additional work. Minor wikilinking/context issues and reference corrections also need to be resolved, but on their own would only place the nomination on hold, rather than a fail.