Talk:Sun Salutation/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Airborne84 (talk · contribs) 03:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review. Worst case, will take no longer than seven days, but should take 2-3 days if no serious issues. --Airborne84 (talk) 03:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for taking this on! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! It's a worthwhile topic. --Airborne84 (talk) 02:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Working, --Airborne84 (talk) 02:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In general, the article is well put together. The only broad issue I see touches on criterion 1a. The prose is somewhat broken or stilted in that there are a number of one or two sentence paragraphs. There's nothing wrong with a paragraph of one sentence, or one word, for that matter, as I'm sure you know. It's just that it's widespread enough that it slightly hampers smooth reading. Maybe it's just me. Anyway, I'll have a go at it instead of just pointing it out. --Airborne84 (talk) 03:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I made a couple of edits in this area. Please check out what I did in "Etymology and origins" to ensure I did not make the text unintelligible as a result, as I rearranged some sentences between paragraphs. If so, please feel free to adjust as needed. --Airborne84 (talk) 04:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. I've tweaked the text and moved one sentence to flow a little better.

Very nice. I had mulled over whether to move the sentence about Pant Pratinidhi to that paragraph but was actually unsure what the sentence referred to. That was my next question. You fixed it and answered the question at the same time. --Airborne84 (talk) 03:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly complete. This wording I had some trouble understanding:

"A 2014 study indicated that different asanas activated particular groups of muscles...."

Please check to see if the change I made is correct or if I did not accurately reflect what the source meant. Thanks. --Airborne84 (talk) 05:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, very good! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap, well done. Thanks for your work here and on Wikipedia! Airborne84 (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]