Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Goa/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because we want to improve this important article, which was a former FA.

Thanks, KensplanetTC 07:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Move the coat of arms somewhere else or remove. (at least out of history)
  • I don't like the malgaadi img; also there are two road imgs.
  • religion box is too wide.

Hometech (talk) 14:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maxim comments Nowhere near FA, and approaching but not yet near GA standards. I'll give some pointers nonetheless:

  • Look over the FAR -- copyediting and citations are still issues
  • While Goa isn't a country in its own right, I will suggest an article like United States as a good example to follow.
  • The TOC is much too big (relates to FA criterion 2b). Make the subdivisions and flora/fauna section subsections of the Geography section; Transport & Tourism into Economy; Languages, Education --> Demographics; Sports, Media --> Culture.
  • Needs copyeditng for flow (get rid of choppy sentences, get connection between them so they flow, as well as connection between paragraphs; see User:Tony1/How to improve your writing for a guide to doing this).
    • The Architecture section contains a maintenance template related to tone.
    • Random example: "During March 2008 Goa was lashed with heavy rain and strong winds. This was the first time in 29 years that Goa had seen rain during March." --> "Goa experienced a heavy rainstorm in March 2008, which was the first time in 29 years that Goa had seen rain during the month of March."
  • There are serious citations issues: many sections are uncited, or have one or two references and there are some [citation needed] tags. An excellent rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref (taken from Ruhrfisch).

Hope this helps, Maxim(talk) 21:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]