Talk:Andhra Pradesh/GA2
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Arjunaraoc (talk · contribs) 13:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Reviewer: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 13:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Prose is largely clear. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
|
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Lot of work is required on citations.
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | Please ensure that the citations mention what is conveyed in the prose. E.g. There is no mention of Kalagnanam being written in 16th century in the quotes. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | As per Earwig, no major issues here. Some sections would be better served with additional sources. Say for e.g. Festivals largely rely on a single source and almost follows the source text. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | There are quite a few sections with just a few sentences or does not have adequate coverage. Would be better to cover with some more detailing. E.g. Services, Air transport, sports, health |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Some sections go into unnecessary detailing in some aspects and give undue weight to certain events/persons. Even peer review comments have pointed out the same.
|
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Most images do not have licensing issues. Some images have restrictions on usage. Please check. E.g. File:Zamin Ryot masthead.jpg |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | There is a lot of image clutter. Almost every section has a gallery of images which are not essential to the content with multiple images being cramped. Please refer to WP:NOTGALLERY and keep only representative images. The images and charts also do not conform to the respective sections and are spilling over to other sections. E.g. Meeseva office image in history, multiple images of rivers, companies, power plants, colleges, temples etc. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | As per the comments, the article needs quite a bit of working. Say for citations, I have checked sample cases while the entire article might yield more similar issues. Please work on addressing the issues completely.
As you have worked on this article extensively and the article has been waiting for a review for a while, I am putting it on hold for the moment. But given the extensive rework required, not sure if you can address the same within the next few days. Let me know your intention on the same. Thanks!
|
@Magentic Manifestations, Thanks for your review. I have read through the review and agree with most of your feedback. I use the following sections for review feedback requiring clarity/discussion. I hope to address the feedback as soon as possible. I will request for additional time after working on it for 3-4 days.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 04:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Arjunaraoc Appreciate the intention. Would be happy to help provide clarity wherever required. You can start working on the article and if it proceeds as expected, no issues in giving it a reasonable few days. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Overlinking
[edit]As the article may be read in parts by readers, I tried to see that linking to same article is not repeated inside each major section(==...==). If the GA recommendation is to link only the first occurence, I will follow the same. Let me know.Arjunaraoc (talk) 04:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- It is a practice to link only the first instance of mention in the article (excluding the lead) across sections. Tables, image captions, templates or infoboxes can be exceptions. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Magentic Manifestations, As per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Duplicate_and_repeat_links and related guidance, I have updated links to provide balanced linking. Arjunaraoc (talk) 15:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
ISBN numbers
[edit]ISBN numbers are quoted as available in the source at the time it is published. Striving for standardisation in this aspect may not be required, as any ISBN can be searched in relevant directories or may not be possible, if the title is not republished after changes to ISBN number standards.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 04:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- You can easily refer to the relevant pages for information. For e.g. Wikipedia:ISBN gives you the required information on why ISBN-13 need to be used, why ISBN is necessary and why hyphens are a good practice. A good article is not an average Wikipedia article and it needs to have uniformity in conforming to the good practice standards. Suggest that you try and address the concerns, rather. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have updated the ISBNs in History section to use ISBN-13 with hyphens. I will address the issue in other sections as well. Arjunaraoc (talk) 03:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
2024 elections coverage
[edit]2024 elections is a major current event, hence it is covered as a subsection under Government and Politics. It also has links to articles which cover the topic in detail. Please elaborate on your feedback.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 04:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Again, undue importance to a particular subject in the context of the larger article. This should rather be a part of the article related to 2024 elections in Andhra Pradesh and not needed to be covered in such a detail in the article about the state. Every election is important and I do not see why only this one should be different. In a good article, sections should be balanced, covering an aspect with sufficient information, not provide too much detailing of a particular subject and not give too much weight to certain aspects. These are listed in the basis criteria for Good articles. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your clarification. I removed the section. Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- On second thoughts, I reinstated a less detailed coverage, as a major current event can not be left out of the article. If you have any further feedback, I will address it as part of update of Government and Politics. --Arjunaraoc (talk) 03:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have removed the section, as it is no longer current. Arjunaraoc (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Images with restrictive usage
[edit]There is only one image (File:Zamin Ryot masthead.jpg) with restrictive usage. This was used to illustrate the history of publishing news in Telugu. Let me know if this needs to be removed.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 05:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- As the license suggests restrictive usage and is suspect, better to remove the same if it not clear. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I removed the image from the article. Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
History section update
[edit]I have updated History section addressing review feedback. I have omitted most of the details, reduced the number of pictures, updated citations to use Cite templates and also updated 13 digit ISBN with hyphens in the citations. I have retained pictures and names of key historical people. Let me know whether the revision meets GA expectation?--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
GA Review 2a feedback
[edit]I have addressed the feedback. --Arjunaraoc (talk) 16:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Additional time required
[edit]@Magentic Manifestations, I think I am half way through the changes. I will need another week to complete the changes. Can you approve the request for additional time and also give your feedback on the changes done so far and discussion items?
- The article seems to be heading in the right direction and has seen significant improvement. You had requested more time to fix this. It has already been on a hold for a few days and as per WP:GAN/I#R3, it can be on hold for up to seven days pending changes. I think, given that we agree there is a large amount to be done and that it will take some time to do, we should end this GAN now. You can address the concerns and renominate it for GAR once done. I look forward to seeing the rewritten article when it is ready. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 08:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Magentic Manifestations, Thanks for your response. I will continue the work and resubmit in due course. Arjunaraoc (talk) 05:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Appreciate the candor. Look forward to the revised article. Thanks. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Update based on GA review item 1b feedback (MOS:Oversection)
[edit]"Culture" is placed after "Demographics". Administration and Politics is combined to form Government and administration. Bifurcation related political issues are moved to a separate article. Science and Technology is now renamed as Research and development and made subsection of Education. Tourism retained as a separate section as it is an important topic that may be of interest to readers. (Previous GA article Karnataka also followed this structure). A new section Infrastructure is introduced to capture Transport, Communication, Water, Power etc, which provide useful info about the state. As there were only few GA articles from India till now, I am proposing the present structure as better. Further tweaking of the structure can be done based on the future GA review feedback.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 06:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- After further thinking and investigation of other GA articles, I moved the contents of Tourism section to Geography, Demographics and culture sections. Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Update based on GA review item 3 feedback (Broad in its coverage)
[edit]Coverage broadened for the section cited in the review and other sections. i.e Services, Air transport, sports, health --Arjunaraoc (talk) 06:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Update based on GA review item 6 feedback (Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio)
[edit]Image clutter removed by removing gallery of pictures at several places in the article and retaining key or representative images or media.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 06:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)