Wikipedia:Peer review/Baichung Bhutia/archive1

Baichung Bhutia[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to see how far it can go. I hope it can be at least a B-class article. It must also be noted that reliable sources are hard to find since Baichung isn't a particularly famous footballer outside India.

Thanks, Spiderone (talk) 10:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

COMMENTS FROM Ankitbhatt

What do you exactly mean by "find it hard to get references"? As far as I can see, there are a substantial number of references already.

Most of the reliable references are the ones about recent events. Spiderone (talk) 15:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section of this article is short and uninformative. It also lacks a freshness and liveliness, and reads more monotonously than you can think. Try improvising on that. Put up the Jhalak Dikhlajaa controversy in the lead.

Speaking of contoversy, the paragraph on the controversy should be longer. Considering it was a near scandal, it has little information. Expansion is necessary.

It is also mentioned in depth in the "Return to India" section of his club career where it mentions his suspension. Spiderone (talk) 15:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other than this, the article seems fine to me. For comparision, try checking out the David Beckham article.

Cheers.

Ankitbhatt (talk) 10:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]