Talk:Shish Gumbad/GA1

Many things to work upon; not eligible for a full review. Some of them

• References in lead
• Prose of poor quality
• "is thought"?
• lack of Reliable source
• "main chamber"?
• "originally" - when did it change?
• lack of WP:IC

The main problem is the length and lack of reliable sources. So quick fail. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 09:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

• Comment. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি, following are my responses;

1. Which criteria of GA nomination talks about length of article? Kindly specify that. There is no such rule.
2. Sources quoted are;
   1. The Hindu
   2. Competent authority of Delhi (another website of Archaeological Survey of India)
   3. Delhi information website.
   4. Expedia
   5. Columbia University Press
   6. Zee News
   7. Archaeological Survey of India website
   8. New Delhi Municipal Council website and more.
3. References in lead: So? Where on Wikipedia does it say that reference cannot be in lead? Read GA Escherichia coli & Badshahi Mosque (both nominated by you) and explain to me what is reference doing in the lead there?
4. Prose of poor quality: Be specific. That's a very vague and loose statement.
5. "is thought"?: Yes, what about it? That's a fact and no-one knows about the exact construction date. Check for the FA Jesus and search for word "thought".
6. lack of Reliable source: Read my point up for sources. The article does NOT lack any reliable sources.
7. "main chamber"?: What do you mean by these words? Be clear please.
8. "originally" - when did it change?: During the course of time it changed. Since when is "wear and tear" a recorded and exact event?
9. lack of WP:IC: Seriously????? Have you even read the article?

It appears that you did a very lazy review of the GA and failed it. And now to cover your acts, you are giving further lame reasons. I don't want to get into a lengthy discussion but either you come up with constructive reasons (criticism) and proper review or revert your review (which you have not done as per proper procedures). Your review did not follow proper procedures and without starting a formal review process (including review template), you just went and declined the GA nomination (without notifying nominator). This GA talk you started after two messages from me. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 10:40, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

• RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি, you have failed to review this GA nomination and did not reply after my comments in Oct 2015. If you are not serious about GA review, then please don't waste time of other editors. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 20:34, 26 May 2016 (UTC)