Jump to content

Talk:Upanishads/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 13:06, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: found and fixed seven.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 13:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[2] Jezhotwells (talk) 13:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

[edit]
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Stray sentence at the end of the lead needs to be consolidated with the preceding paragraph. Green tickY
    The lead does not fully summarise the article, see WP:LEAD Green tickY
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Citation needed tags from August 2010 need addressing. Green tickY
    I added one more citation needed tag. After this, the Upanishads were rapidly translated into Dutch, Polish, Japenese and Russian Green tickY
    Assume good faith for off-line sources, sources appear reliable.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    The oldest of these, the Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads, were composed during the pre-Buddhist era of India Needs a date as the reader may not be familiar with the pre-Bhuddist era. Green tickY
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
    Images tagged and captioned.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    OK, On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:39, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine, thanks for fixing those issues. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 20:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update

[edit]

I've addressed the GA review recommendations in the following manner:

GA criterion 1(b)

  • Updated lead to include a summary of praise and criticism for completeness [3]
  • Merged the stray sentence withe the paragraph above it [4]

GA criterion 2(a)

  • Provided citations or deleted content with {{cn}} tags for which I have not been able to find sources [5] [6]

GA criterion 3(a)