Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Kolkata/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review | Kolkata
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Peer review/Kolkata)

Kolkata

edit

The article has improved a lot in last few months, especially during the last week when it was the Indian COTW. The size has been greatly reduced from the previous monstrous size, forks have been created, new template has been added, references and relevant images added. However, the article deviates at some portion from the recommended Indian city formats, though the deviations are not unprecedented (compared to other city articles like this). The article yet needs some more references and maybe some more yet unmentioned aspects. Of course, Kolkata needs some copyedit also as errors continue to creep in. The language has been tried to be made NPOV as far as possible. Please help enhancing the article. Thank you.--Dwaipayanc 10:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice. Some work on sections, like Utility services and Media would be apericiable. Other than these two sections all are nicely covered. Some images are licensed under {{PD-US}}. I am not sure with this tag, is it suitable to them. Shyam (T/C) 11:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good start and I sincerely hope this article can get featured. But I have lots of issues with this article.
  1. Lead needs to be smoothened. Avoid the use of specific figures."Done"
  2. Lead should summarise the article. Copyedit needed.
  3. Avoid specific dates in ==History=. "In process"
  4. India's first railway was built between Diamond Harbour and Calcutta -- I'd like to see a credible source. -- "Provisionally removed as no credible source found"
  5. The history needs a good rewrite. We can't just have the "firsts" in India. 1800-1870 seems to have escaped a mention. Comment: Having trouble rewriting the history. Need more references and a nice flow of language. Please help. Tried to include 1800s.--Dwaipayanc 03:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. city's port was bombed by the Japanese -- please reference. I've never heard of it. "Done".
  7. Bengal Famine? "Yes. Bengal famine of 1943"
  8. See also: Kolkata trivia -- remove. "Done".
  9. =Climate= needs more references for figures. Extreme temperatures needed. "Done"
  10. Mention the districts Kolkata comprises "Done (?)"
  11. =Civic Administration= refer to Mumbai "Almost done"--Dwaipayanc 20:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. =Culture= section should not have subsections. "Please specify reason why Culture should not have subsections." Summarise and remove list material "provisionally done"--Dwaipayanc 18:28, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. remove list material in =Media= "Provisionally removed"
  14. ==Tourism== section needs to be removed from the article. "Done"--Dwaipayanc 18:28, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Please remove all but the most famous institutions from =Education=. "Done".

Further review after completion of the above. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Nichalp for your characteristic subjective objective and extremely specific review of Kolkata. We shall try to mend the defects you have pointed out. However, I have 2 points to ask:
(1) Why do you always make it sure that "Tourism" is not included? (I have seen you reccomending this before). Is it a Wikipedia rule?
(2) I disagree with you that section "Culture" should not have subsections. There are so many city articles with subsections in "Culture".For example, Canberra ( which is an FA). You would perhaps cite the Indian city format. But in any case, that is not a hard and fast rule! Please comment and help improve the article. Thanks a lot.--Dwaipayanc 14:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above post could very well be read as sarcasm. I really don't need to defend myself against "subjective comments" as I've always had the best interests in the improvement of articles -- me being a perfectionist. To answer your query: 1) =Tourism= is extremely subjective. We have a dedicated wikiproject, Wikitravel which takes care of the tourism aspect. The article is an encyclopedia and should not be read like a tourist brochure. Important points of tourism such as museums can be easily merged with culture. 2) I was asked to review the Canberra article by the nominator before it was featured. (Archive here) The subheadings were added much later and I supported the article without the subheadings. WP:WIAFA mentions that the ToC should not be overwhelming. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please Nichalp, I am sorry if I have hurt you. Beleive me, the comment was not sarcasm as it seemed to you. I revere you as one of the oldest and most experienced wikipedian. And sorry for another mistake I committed , it was a disgraceful typo: I typed "Subjective" in stead of intended "objective". LoL. Please excuse me. And thanks a lot again for your extremely objective and careful review.--Dwaipayanc 19:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No grudges taken, but I request you to work on what I have reviewed. Those Culture subsections need to go, history made more fluid, tourism needs to go. On completion please let me know so that I can deep review. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a nice reference to bombing of Kolkata by Japanese. I have added that as a reference. Please also see this and the December 20 entry in this for futher references. However, nowhere it is mentioned that bombing was specifically done on the Calcutta port, whereas the personal account of Mrs Katyun Randhawa states the name of Howrah bridge. We can remove the word "port" if others agree. Thanks. BTW, deleted the info on first railway between Calcutta and Diamond harbour - as no credible sources available. --Dwaipayanc 14:44, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Many City articles, including FAs, have section "Tourism" or section like "Tourism". For example, Bath, Boston (under the subsection of "Sites of Interest', under "Culture"), Sarajevo, Sheffield (as a subsection "Arractions" under "Culture and attractions"), Louisville (under gross heading of People and culture) etc. I know the section "Tourism" is against the rules laid out in Wikiproject Indian cities. However, is that very strict rule? Or, is it possible to incorporate such content under other sections? Please help. Thanks.--Dwaipayanc 18:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From WP:WIAFA: 3) It complies with the standards set out in the style manual and relevant WikiProjects. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments: Hi, pretty neat job so far. I'm going to list my concerns/suggestions below:
    • Can we expand on the Origin of Name section? Dosen't have to be by too much — just another couple of sentences would suffice.
"I don't think it is needed to increase for the sake of increasing. If somebody thinks that some vital/ important information has not been discussed under the section "Name" he/ she is welcome to modify the section."--Dwaipayanc 08:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree. The point that I was trying to make though was if there is more relevent, pertinent information out there that relates to the origins of the city's name, it should be included. AreJay 03:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • In history, The then ruler of Bengal Siraj Ud Daulah attacked the Fort William at Kolkata due to various percieved provocations by the British, such as improving the city's fortifications. What does this sentence mean? I can't understand what its trying to say...rephrase?
"well, this has a bit of history itself! 139.168.93.82 inserted the words "perceived" and some more ( detailed Here). Perhaps the anon wanted to make the view point of British clear. We retained his insertions after a bit of modification. This may need further rephrasing."--Dwaipayanc 08:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC) " Rephrased and removed debatable portion".--Dwaipayanc 04:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kolkata is an unplanned city that developed as per the need of the citizen. Please rephrase and/or delete — this is a situation that most cities in developing countries face. I don't think it is specific to Kolkata. "done"
" Please specify why do you wanr to merge Utilities aith civic administrations. Thses 2 subsections have been kept seperate a la Mumbai "--Dwaipayanc 08:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The request to merge the two was bourne out of the fact that neither section, as it stood at the time of my review, looked comprehensive enough to stand independently. There is no harm in separating the two, provided both sections are adequately expanded. On the other hand, I merged Utilities within Civic Administration in Bangalore because the provision of utility services by the municapity and other governmental bodies falls under the Civic administration umbrella. AreJay 03:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Now the civic administration is undergoing some expansion. Utility services need more matter. If we fail to provide the Utility services with more fact, we'll definitely ponder over merging the two. Thanks for pointing out.--Dwaipayanc 03:53, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Umm, you will have to dwell deeper into the matter. this seems to point to a lot more instances of ethnic/religious/communal incidents than has been discussed in the article. What about the Bengali refugees that the city took in prior to and during the Indo-Pak 1971 War..was there tension between them and the citizens? You can expand on Direct Action Day here..you may want to look into that. AreJay 03:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Direct Action Day has been covered under "History" and thought it would be a repeat to expand on it under "Demographics". That is why the words "after independence" were added along with the referenced comment on the relative communal peace in Kolkata. I do not have any ready reference, but I know that there was tension between the refugees and the residents during the Bangladeh liberation war. However, the tension never amounted to any siginificant sort of violence. It would be satisfying to include that piece of information, I am looking for a solid reference. The most brutal of the riots, i.e. the 1992-93 riots has been stated. Do you think more expansion needed on that? I do not think so as the article is already getting alarmingly bigger in size, as more info is being put. The only othet tension I found out was during the Naxalite movement, that has been touched in the "History" section, and that seems not be related to "Demographics" much. Please comment.--Dwaipayanc 03:53, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. As a matter of fact, another smaller riot occured- after the killing of Indira Gandhi - directed against the Sikh community. I shall try to fit in the information, some reference would be helpful though.--Dwaipayanc 03:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is nothing in the History section about the city's history in the 1950s-60s as well as 80s and 90s. Some information needs to be added. "Done".--Dwaipayanc 07:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC) "History section needs a thourough re-write".--Dwaipayanc 20:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • A nice map of the city would work wonderfully.
    • Sub-sections do not look appropriate for Culture. Please summarize and merge. "Done"
    • I am okay with the Tourism section so long as the verbiage is encyclopedic and the content is NPOV. Per Nichalp's discussion above, this section should be perged.
    • I will post some additional comments when these issues are addressed. Thanks and good luck y'all! AreJay 19:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up review

edit

Great job, Dwaipayanc — I like the way things are taking shape. The biggest problem now with the article relates to copyediting. I will list the various issues below. Let us cleanup the article a couple of sections at a time. Below is my primary review. Thanks

    • Several factors like labour troubles since the end of 1960s such as the predominence of trade-unions in the industries, severe power shortages, limitations on raw materials, shortage of capital, a slow depletion of water volume in the Hugli River limiting the size of ships at Kolkata’s docks. led to the economic decline of the city in 1960s to 1980s Please rephrase this sentence. Perhaps break it up into two; there are so many commas in the sentence that one tends to lose track of what the central theme of the sentence being presented is. - Done
    • while there are some natural depressions in the area, probably dead river channels. I would break this up into two sentences as well...There are natural depressions in the area, which are probably dead river channels. - Removed
    • Human habitation has led to the establishment of mature trees and shrubs. Can we perhaps further explain the correlation between human habitation and the establishment of trees and shrubs in the region? - Removed
    • The approximate °F value for all temperatures must be noted. Done--Dwaipayanc 06:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The main seasonal influence upon the climate is the monsoon. I understand the idea that you are trying to present here, but perhaps it can be rephrased?- provisionally done
    • Mean ventilation coefficients... I would explain the values noted and wikify where necessary - "sentence removed, as this parameter did not seem much important and difficult to explain. Check out about what it is here" --Dwaipayanc 05:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Kolkata is an unplanned city and with an area of 185 km².. This gives the impression that the city just sort of came to be and is now growing, bereft of any planning..which is obviously not true. I do not know a whole lot about Kolkata but based on what I have read from the history section and the old Tourism section, there was some city planning involved. I don't know if I would use the phrase "unplanned city".- provisionally done
    • The North Kolkata...This would just be North Kolkata...or the north Kolkata locality..ditto for The South Kolkata and the Central Kolkata- done
    • Please address the commets noted above. Like I said, let us copyedit the article a couple of sections at a time. Thanks AreJay 22:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
More comments
  • I've copyedited it a bit, but I still need you to go through the following before I continue:
  1. I believe the Victoria Memorial documents the city's history pretty well. I'm sure there must be some good information available there.
  2. The vehicle code(s) needs to be added in the infobox.
  3. References needed for climate figures. Use non breaking spaces &nbsp; between a unit and its numeral. (I've done a few). Comment - All the figures in climate is taken from two references: This and that, and have been cited.--Dwaipayanc 06:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. I've found numerous errors in the article, I'll copyedit later. Stuff on the Calcutta High Court, the stock exchange etc.
  5. Culture needs to be cut down. - "Started to cut down culture"
I hope that things are not cut down for the sake of cutting down. I am not from Kolkata and I really like the details in the culture section. It shows the unique aspects of Kolkata from other Indian cities. I reckon it can be made a little shorter but I am not sure how. Only thing I can think of is that the architecture section does not fit very nicely in there. However, since tourism was nixed their is no other place for that important information. Maybe in ubran structure? --Blacksun 17:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. I've embedded a few comments in the text, please address it. I took care of one of the comments that I found--Blacksun 17:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

=Nichalp «Talk»= 09:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More comment

I have a feeling that the article does not indicate the so many negative aspects of the city. For example, the poverty, the slums, the indifferent nature of the common man etc. The sobriquet "dying city" is also not there in the article any more. Can you suggest where to or how to integrate such aspects?--Dwaipayanc 05:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can craft the most alarming or important negative aspects (slums, suicide, unemployment, etc) into a one-sentence description in the lead while relegating less important negative details to "Demographics". You can have a look at Chetwynd, British Columbia (note how they incorporate crime stats and other negative info). On the other hand, I don't think there's a big problem with "whitewashing" in this article — as long as slum stats, crime, poverty rates, etc are dealt with, you don't need to worry about including every negative epithet used for the city. Other than doing light copy-editing (I've done some) and the advice given by others, I don't have much to add. This is getting close to featured status, and we can have (LOL) three Bengal-related FACs (Bangladesh, Rabindranath Tagore, and Kolkata) up for review at the same time. Saravask 08:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crime stats have been added, to some extent. Some "negative" statements like the depressive economy in 1970s and 1980s have been added. Unreferenced statement on people living in streets and footpath have also been added. Poverty rates could not be added due to lack of reference. Copyedits are going on. Please help!--Dwaipayanc 16:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just have one comment. A city article should have a skyline picture.--ppm 19:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is we could not find out one good free skyline pic. There was one previously, but the quality was not really good. Bye.--Dwaipayanc 18:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have two small suggestions for the infobox. First, in population replace "lakh" with a raw number. No other figure in the infobox uses that combination of number and word, and as the infobox is supposed to be a quick reference tool (to avoid weeding through prose to get a simple figure) the "lakh" unit is not the most accessible form of expressing a number (but I suspect nearly everyone can understand what "1,400,000" means, opposed to "14 lakhs"). Second, the Density seems to be missing a unit. If it means 11,000 people/km², then say that. "People" is just as much a valid unit as meters or stones or apples. --maclean25 19:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done--Dwaipayanc 20:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the present state of the article is fantastic, having at one point of time worked on the article single-handedly (and very badly may I add) myself. I have a few suggestions though.

  1. The map in the infobox - is that part of the template for Indian cities ? I find the colours very distracting and unmeaningful. I would much rather prefer a map template as in Kharagpur, neat and immediately focussing the user's eye on the desired location.
  2. A map of Calcutta with not too much detail, and which is not too touristy, listing the major neighborhoods, the bridges, the rail lines, and arterial roads of Kolkata and Howrah. (tall demand, I know - but it would be good even to get some approximation of this)
  3. I read the conversation about subsectioning culture. I personally feel that the culture section is too much of a pot-pourri and should be subsectioned.
  4. The article mentions 14 boroughs. Should that be spelt out with small annotations ? I think a complete article on Calcutta, in the section on Geography, should have a subsection on neighbourhoods. I think it should also spell out the five informal regions that Kolkata is made up of - North, Central, South, Salt Lake and New Town.
  5. An iconic photo would help - skyline from Maidan or Hooghly, or even the controlled access ramp system and the Second Hooghly Bridge.
  6. Dare I suggest this when I know so little about it myself - how about a section on Kolkata architecture ? Mix of the old and the new, the distinctive facading of British Calcutta, North Calcutta, South Calcutta and Salt Lake, the recent explosion of overbridges (this is one thing I did not find mentioned in the transport section), the historic facade preservation row, maybe these warrant a separate article, but a section would also be good.
  7. I strongly think that trivia should be the penultimate subsection before References. A full trivia section could be a separate article, but more interesting and illuminating facts and figures could be touched upon. It helps end an article smoothly too, albeit at the risk of making it un-encyclopaedic. Currently, I think the article ends too abruptly.
  8. Kolkata in art - should this be in culture or media. Probably maybe not even in the main article but in the subsidiary articles. But artistic depictions of Kolkata have led Indian urban artistic depictions, in much the same way NYC street photography led and still leads street photography the world over. Desmand Doig, Rathin Mitra, the Daniel(l) brothers or cousins or whatever.
  9. Being very finicky as a photographer, I think the photograph of the Howrah Bridge should be slightly edited. It is a lovely shot - but to perfect it , it would need to be rotated and probably slightly cropped.
  10. In the Utility Services section, the Fire Services should be mentioned. Since quite a few notable Kolkata heritage buildings succumbed to flames ( Bourne & Shephard, Firpo's, New Market) I think a brief mention of its lack of capability to tackle the difficult job of fighting fire in an old, unplanned city.
  11. Calcutta University's turn of the century heritage should also probably be touched upon in the education section, and the reason for construction of BESU, JU and ISI. A short paragraph highlighting some information, rather than a list of college and university names which conveys little information. Such a list would be better off in the Kolkata - related topics box.
  12. Copyediting - overuse of the article, particularly preceding proper nouns. Some of them can probably be done away with.

Again - overall, I think the present status of the article is just great! Keep up the good work! Pradiptaray 23:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certain suggestions by you (like sub-sectioning the culture, adding trivia, adding Kolkata in art etc.)cannot be done as that would not be appropriate by the rule laid out in Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities. The locator map, and a city map - we are working on that, as I have indicated in your talk page. Addition of fire brigade in the Utility and modification of "Education" will be done. An iconic photo will be a delight to add, but have not found one yet. Please feel free to crop the howrah bridge photo as you think necessary. The size of the article is a concern now, that's why we did not add info like the names of the 14 boroughs , neighbourhoods etc. Thanks a lot for your review. Bye.--Dwaipayanc 05:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Kolkata/archive1&oldid=1082504738"