| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because…I want to get it to GA or FA status which ever it will be ready for. All comments are welcomed
Thanks, RADICAL SODA(FORCE) 06:43, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
- Brief comments, since the article is in rather poor shape and concerns over details are likely to be rendered irrelevant by any later improvements. The article is far too short, and what is currently there is often unsourced. The "Issues" section appears to be synth at best; there is little evidence that the points listed there are considered to be the most serious issues with the government by reliable sources. There is absolutely no reason to give the details of a specific, recent budget in the finance section. The "PIL" and "Cabinet secretary" sections are probably undue weight. Much of the content is in the form of lists, rather than substantive prose. Vanamonde (talk) 06:34, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
- Vanamonde93I have addressed you concerns about undue weight and the inclusion of the budget details. Please take a look.Hopeful to adress the other issues within the nxt two days -RADICAL SODA(FORCE) 05:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)