Talk:Kek Lok Si
Appearance
Kek Lok Si has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: April 25, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kek Lok Si article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A fact from Kek Lok Si appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 May 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Largest Buddhist Temple in Southeast Asia
[edit]The article says it is the largest buddhist temple in southeast asia but I believe Angkor Wat holds that distinction.Pwordisony (talk) 11:56, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- Angkor Wat is an ancient and ruined Hindu temple and not a Buddhist temple.--Nvvchar. 11:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Kek Lok Si/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Muffin Wizard (talk · contribs) 11:18, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
I will do a review on this article as soon as possible, but please be patient. :)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- All references used are reliable sources, seems fine.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Good.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Seems neutral.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Seems fine, I see no edit war.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- I see all images are available freely to use.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall: After a frequent more check to the article, I see there is no more problem, so I give it a passed, thanks for all your time to work on this article. :)
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail: