Talk:P. V. Narasimha Rao/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

To uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of January 23, 2010, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   the use of first names or popularly known as names are deprecated in MoS, pleae use Rao consistently throughout.

   Economic reforms: the list needs to be turned into prose

   Corruption scandals: Some of the more prominent examples were: Bad prose, as if introducing a list. Please rephrase.

   Legacy: turn into prose

   Overall: the whole artcile could do with thorough copy-editing.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   There are a number of dead links [1]; and there are citation needed tags which need addressing

   citations need to be consistently formatted, I recommend using the appropriate citation templates.

   ref #13 [2] was to a blog not RS - now a dead link

   ref #15 [3] is a blog

   ref #17 [4] is to geocities, not a RS

   can you demonstrate that ref #21 [5] is a RS?

   ref #25 [6] is a blog

   can you demonstrate that ref #30 [7] is a RS, likewise ref #37 [8] and ref #41 [9]

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:

   Controversy after death: For one thing, the Gandhi dynasty’s penchant to bury non-dynasty leaders as immaterial has kept PVN in the forgotten category. POV statemnet

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:

   I am going to delist this artcile as it needs more work than can be done in a few days. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

   Major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)