Talk:Banglapedia: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:28, 14 January 2008

Banglapedia was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 7, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
January 14, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Banglapedia received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Books B‑class

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Bangladesh B‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Bangladesh To-do list:

Add more images to Bangladesh Liberation War and related pages
Clean up Climate change in Bangladesh, it needs a lot of work
Clean up History of Bangladesh after independence, it needs NPOV
Improve Bangladesh back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengali language back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengalis and related pages
Take a look at the requested articles.
Make a MRT line 3 article.
Extend, add an infobox and a map of New Eskaton to New Eskaton.

Merge from Sirajul Islam

Please refer to Talk:Sirajul Islam#Merge. --Ragib 08:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
Overall:
a Pass/Fail:

Passages like this are neither referenced nor NPOV:

It is easy to navigate, laid out in alphabetical order and is prefaced by an extremely detailed essay by the Chief Editor. However, there is also a section explaining how to use the Banglapedia, which clarifies issues such as date systems, contributors, cross references, and headings.

¿SFGiДnts! ^{¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review!} 00:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I have put this on hold. Try to find more references (there are still unsourced statements). ¿SFGiДnts! ^{¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review!} 04:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All concerns have been addressed, congrats! ¿SFGiДnts! ^{¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review!} 20:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vidyakalpadruma...?

Do we really need the boxed quote on this topic? It doesn't seem to be directly related to Banglapedia. Is it there simply as an example of a Banglapedia entry? If so it should be properly marked as such. Arman Aziz 01:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That boxed quote is irrelevant to this entry. I don't think it's an example of Banglapedia entry. It should immediately be removed.--NAHID 11:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It is a Banglapedia entry (regardless of what you think, that fact remains a fact) and it also imparts information about one of the examples of earlier attempts at a Bangla encyclopedia. Quotes from a book to give an idea of the quality is a standard practice and hardly seems to irrelevant, especially as it is close to the subject in discussion. Why do you think it should be immediately removed? I guess that "properly marked as such" thing can be done. Any proposition to that end? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've mentioned in the box that it is being used as a sample. Arman ^(Talk) 11:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 |action2result=pass
 |action2oldid=146380146
+|action2=GAR
-|currentstatus=GA
+|action2date=January 14 2008
+|action2link=Talk:Banglapedia#Delisted from GA
+|action2result=delisted
+|action2oldid=184203531
+|currentstatus=DGA
 |topic=Langlit
 }}
 {{oldpeerreview}}
-{{WPBooks|class=GA}}
+{{WPBooks|class=B}}
-{{WP Bangladesh|class=GA|importance=high|selected article=January 2008}}
+{{WP Bangladesh|class=B|importance=high|selected article=January 2008}}
 ==Merge from Sirajul Islam==