Talk:Jyestha (goddess)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 11:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: none found.
Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- The prose is very poor throughout. This article needs thorough copy-editing by an uninvolved editor with a good command of written English.
- The organisation is bitty, the whole is not coherent. Please see Shiva for an example of what to aim at.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- Those references that I could examine appeared reliable.
- I added two citation needed tags.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Hard to say, but most of the article relies on one source.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- The image File:Jyeshtha.jpg could do with a better description, identifying the period of creation and where it was found.
- Likewise File:Sagar mathan.jpg
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- This article clearly isn't ready for GA status yet. Please get it rewritten in good plain English. See what other sources are out there. GA review is not a substitute for peer review. Please do not nominate at GAN until articles meet the criteria. Failed nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
- User:Redtigerxyz has asked for expansion of my comment about organisation. The following sentence above about taking a good look at the organisation of the good article Shiva is meant as a pointer to what a good artcile on a deity should look like. Obviously an article on Jyestha is never going to be as large as that on Shiva, but the general layout and sectioning would be a good boilerplate for this article. Hope this helps. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
- This article clearly isn't ready for GA status yet. Please get it rewritten in good plain English. See what other sources are out there. GA review is not a substitute for peer review. Please do not nominate at GAN until articles meet the criteria. Failed nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: