Jump to content

Talk:Kulottunga I/GA2

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to take this one up, sad it had to wait this long. It's refreshing to return after a break and get to read such a beautiful article. @Nittawinoda: Notifying the nominator who has an alternative account now.

I will be posting my comments here soon. Hopefully the review will be complete within a few days. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sainsf:, thank you for the positive comments and for taking up this review request. I will address the issues that you have pointed out below in the upcoming days. Once I do, I will tag them as complete by replying inline below. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. Please take your time but keep responding regularly. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nittawinoda: Thanks for your response. I will go through the changes in a day or two. Till then you can keep copyediting mostly, and I would be happy to help with any issue related to it. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 20:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sainsf:, I have addressed most of the issues(if not all) raised below. I will continue to copyedit the article in the next few days. Meanwhile as you said, please review it and let me know if any changes are required. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:12, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nittawinoda: Sorry for the delay. I will finish up looking at the changes shortly. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 20:13, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nittawinoda: I have carefully gone through the article till and including "Sakkarakottam". Please check the edits I have made and copyedit the rest of the article similarly, I still find errors. References look okay now. And I have added a few points too. Will continue with the rest of the article soon. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:56, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sainsf: Thanks for fixing the errors. I have also gone through the article and fixed some issues. Do continue with the review. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]
  • If possible, it would be great to have the name of the king in a local language as well, in the infobox too.
The Tamil transliteration used to be there until an editor removed it ([1] citing WP:NOINDICSCRIPT. I would suggest against adding the name in the regional language as his kingdom spanned several regions that spoke different languages. This would trigger his fans to add his name in their own language. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In that case it is OK, leave it as it is. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...11th-century monarch of the Chola Empire Could we add a bit on where this Empire was located? Like modern southern India or something more accurate, but it would help someone who has no prior knowledge of Indian empires or their areas of influence.
Done. Added location as "South India". Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... who bore the title Kulottunga, literally meaning the exalter of his race Kulottunga should probably be in quotes. And what language is it originally from, so that it translates to the given meaning?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...prince of the Eastern Chalukya dynasty Please link Eastern Chalukya
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • His mother was a Chola princess... No mention of his father in the lead?
Done. Added details about his father. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • His accession marked the beginning of a new era and ushered in a period of internal peace and benevolent administration Is this a general observation agreed upon by several authors, or opinion of someone (say from the citation following right after it)? It would be good to specify.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • kingdom of Pagan(Burma) missing space
Done
  • In the 2nd para "he" has been used continuously, could switch to his name once or twice in between
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • famous poem Kalingattu parani This poem name is in italics and both words combined in the next section. Please be consistent in what format you use; I think looking at the linked article that you should combine them and use italics.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Like his predecessors, he was a patron of arts and literature and the famous poem Kalingattu parani was composed during his rule and is attributed to Jayamkondar "and" looks a bit repeated, connecting 3 sections of the sentence and without commas too
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You might want to move the citations to the main body. Per WP:MOS it is recommended that the lead only be a summary of most of the article, not stating new facts.
Are you suggesting I remove all the references in the lede? Thanks. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To put it more clearly, the MOS recommends that you add sourced material to the main body and when you write the lede you summarize most of the article in it, such that no new facts are introduced in the lede. So there would be no point of keeping citations in the lede, given all of it is accounted for in the main body. So we can do away with citations there. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am still awaiting your response regarding this.
I prefer to keep the refs in the lede as I've noticed editors changing or adding details when there are no references. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • New points:
  • According to historian Sen Introduce by the full name as you have done for Sastri
Done Nittawinoda (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

[edit]
  • ...of the Lord Sri Rajendra Choladeva Why is "the" used?
Done, removed "the Lord". Nittawinoda (talk) 17:14, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chakrakota mandala(Bastar in modern Chhattisgarh) space
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:14, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accession

[edit]
  • According to the Tamil poem Kalingathuparani, note my comment in lead. Occurs at many places in the article
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bilhana's Vikramankadevacharita please introduce Bilhana
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vikramaditya VI and Vikkiraman Solan Ula(a work on comma before "and", missing space
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • the king wore the excellent crown of jewels by right to prevent the goddess Lakshmi of Southern region from becoming common property and to remove the loneliness of the goddess of the Chola country adorned by Ponni(Kaveri) Not sure that I understand this, and missing space in the end
Done. Added more details. His records poetically allude to the meddling of affairs by his rivals and to the power vaccuum in the state during his accession. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to historian Sastri Say his full name, as he is introduced in the text for first time after lead
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • He had a prosperous reign characterized by unparalleled success and laid the foundation for the well being of the empire for the next 150 years So that it not sound like original research, you could say if many sources agree on this or some one person states this
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • New points:
  • Explain "Chakrakota mandala"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Military campaigns

[edit]
  • In the 5th year of his reign Virarajendra Chola Should be "fifth", single digit numbers are typically written in words
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kulottunga Chola I who in his inscriptions comma before "who"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure of the use of italics in "treachery" and "Land of Rising Sun". Do quotes work?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to historian Sastri Can omit "historian", he has already been introduced
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • just like Vishnu( who in his Varaha avatar) Please introduce "Vishnu", fix the spaces
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • he gently raised the goddess of the earth residing in the Land of the rising sun and placed her under the shade of his parasol What exactly is meant by this? And should it be "goddess earth"?
In India, there is a goddess of earth just as there is a goddess of wealth(Lakshmi), goddess of learning, etc. Parasol is a signature of royalty and the kings and even now idols of gods are accompanied by a fancy umbrella. The statement means that the king was pleased to bring the region (goddess of earth) around (who resided in) "the Land of the rising sun" (the region in around Konark_Sun_Temple) under his rule (placed her under the shade of his parasol). It should be "goddess of earth". Nittawinoda (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Western Chalukya - Chola rivalry I think spaces on either side of this hyphen are unnecessary
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • their Chalukyas rivals out of the battlefield Putting "rivals" before "Chalukyas" sounds better
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • rivals out of the battlefield, occupying their capital, with death of their generals or feudatories and levying tribute Could be rewritten as "rivals out of the battlefield, with the death of their generals or feudatories, occupying their capital and levying tribute". Actually "their Chalukyas rivals" could just be reworded "the Chalukyas" as the "their" causes confusion later about whose "generals or feudatories" die at last, plus even "Chalukyas rivals" sounds a bit weird.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • his son Satyashraya who were opponents of Raja Raja Chola I and Rajendra Chola I ended Commas before "who" and "ended"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ahavamalla Someshwara I is referred to as "Ahavamalla (Someshwara I)" later. Stick to one name
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • in not less five occasions I guess you mean "on not less than five"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • put to flight his two sons Unclear whose sons they are
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vikkalan(Vikramaditya VI) and Singanan(Jayasimha III) spaces
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please split the first line of 2nd para of "Western Chalukya Conflicts" into at least 2 parts, it is long and difficult to keep up with. before he could untie the necklace(of a yuvaraja in order to wear the one of a king during coronation) he had put on Could do with better explanation (and see the spaces)
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Western Chalukya Conflicts" Conflicts should be in lowercase
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • for we find no mention of him "We" is not the right way to speak here, say "no mention of him is found" instead
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • who in his 5th year states that unable to bear reword as "who in his fifth year states that, unable to bear" and also a comma after "war" in calling for war but in the end.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • on the life of Vikramaditya VI who claims that Ahavamalla I guess you mean Bilhana is the one claiming, not Vikramaditya. Please clarify that
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • A clarification on "ritual suicide" would help (in committing ritual suicide)
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • him the Rattapadi seven and a half lakh country Check the grammar here
Done. Place is called as Rattapadi-7.5lakh-country. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • by putting the necklace putting it where?
Done. Reworded. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was also another player namely Vijayaditya Probably "contender" is a better word, and omit "namely", just put the name between commas
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • So at the end of Virarajendra's reign... fix the brackets and spaces in this line
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kulottunga's accession for it simply comma before "for"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • was completely routed and were chased Omit "were"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Singanam were the regions What other regions except "Singanam"?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • word Konkana desam(country of Konkan) space. Also, no full stop is there after this line.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kulottunga broke the pride of Vikramaditya Is it a statement by a historian?
Done. Reworded to "Kulottunga claims in his records". Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the above line, who "claims" and "states"? Also, spacing errors and it is "nowhere" not "no where"
Done. Fixed. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • in some other records states that ... bent against his enemy(that is Kulottunga). Many grammatical errors. And this whole sentence is too long, and tough to read. Break it up and fix the errors.
Reworded and fixed. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is conceded by Bilhana The link should only have been where the name is first mentioned. Same for many others.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vikramankadevacarita as he states that -> "Vikramankadevacarita, wherein he states that". More spacing errors later
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • for his coronation Who is "his"?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pandyas into his fold comma
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • viceroys but by the time comma
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • energy for the suppression I think "to" is better than "for"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I feel I will leave the prose editing for the rest of the article from here on to you as there are many mistakes which need serious attention and you can do it best, it is tiring for me. Note that unless all these are fixed I will not be able to pass this article. Please take your time and do a careful copyedit of the whole text. I would focus on other issues.

  • where the glorious king Glorious in whose opinion?
Done(removed). It is in his records. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Vikrama Solan Ula describes What text is this?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • first prakara of the Nataraja temple What is prakara?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Virarajendra Chola being a fine statesman must have agreed... Whose statement is this?
Removed. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to one view these three regions Specify whose view
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • for we first hear of it from an inscription Reword it as I suggested earlier in a similar case of "we". Similarly "we may conclude that this perhaps occurred" (better say who opines that we can conclude so, or say "it implies"). Also "We have an inscription of Kulottunga from the Bhimesvara temple".
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • is the subject of the celebrated Tamil poem Kalingathupparani Such a good introduction should have been right at the start. Plus the spelling you use differs everywhere. Same for According to historian Nilakanta Sastri later on.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anantavarman was related to Kulottunga One may be curious how they were related.
added relationship. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:06, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • He is described as a sad(good)-vaishnava Not sure what it means
Explained. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rajaraja Chola I, Rajendra Chola I, Rajadhiraja Chola I etc Not sure etc. looks good, maybe say "predecessors like Rajaraja Chola I, Rajendra Chola I and Rajadhiraja Chola I" it would do as you are just saying examples.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The issues stated above continue in the rest of the article but I leave it to you to check the whole article for such issues and fix them.

Overseas contacts

[edit]
  • Kulottunga Chola I maintained overseas contacts It is good to stick with one name for the person throughout the article
Done.Nittawinoda (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • converted the Chola to the teachings of Buddha You mean to Buddhism?
Yes. Changed phrase to Buddhism. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What exactly are gold leaves?
The king's letter was inscribed on gold foils. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would do good to recall that I am afraid sounds more like a textbook and not an encyclopedia
Done. Removed phrase. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stick to either AD or CE throughout
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extent of the Empire

[edit]
  • Probably the "E" in Empire should be small in the heading. Similarly small A for "Architecture" in "Art and Architecture" section.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • in his forty-fifth regnal year Better say 45th
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administration

[edit]
  • "abhisheka mandapam", "munaiyar" and many terms in the 2nd para could be explained better. Also stay consistent in the use of italics.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:48, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Religious attitude

[edit]
  • Check the language "There is no reason to believe this argument for we have him making donations"
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:43, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Art and Architecture

[edit]
  • 1113 - add AD or CE
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Inscriptions

[edit]
  • wear the excellent crown of jewels of the Chola country Why is excellent stressed?
Removed italics. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

General

[edit]
  • Many duplicate links. Please ensure that one word is linked only once in the main body (lead can have one more link).
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many errors with spaces and brackets. Please check.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The prose often suffers from very long sentences and could do with a thorough copyedit.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that if you use italics for the names of works, stay consistent about it throughout the article.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Recalled one more point. Please use Indian English throughout the article (per MOS).
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

[edit]
  • Sources look good, but many little issues with citation format. I have never seen the mention of total number of pages in Wiki citations. Please omit those, only keep the page/pages parameter. There are a few errors in them too, say in ref. 38, where it should be pp. 307-308 not p. Plus in ref. 70 surely a state can not be an author. Please fix these issues and check all references.
Corrected the citations and I have removed/replaced the one which had the state as the author. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:40, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

[edit]

These are my comments after a thorough read of the article. In my opinion it is excellent in coverage and has great sources to rely on, but requires serious and extensive copyediting. Plus the language is slightly uncyclopedic in some parts. My overall assessment right now is as follows: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    Could do with more images, text alone might appear uninteresting
Added more relevant images. Nittawinoda (talk) 16:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Final checks

[edit]

Hi, sorry for the delay in my response. I have been really busy the last few weeks. I went through the whole article and it seems to be in good shape. I have copyedited it quite a bit here and there and I request you to look at a few final points before I can pass this article:

  • Be consistent in using "AD". Sometimes "CE" has also been used.
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The kingdom of Kalinga ... north-eastern parts of Odisha), Kosala ... present-day Orissa Two different spellings for "Odisha"?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second invasion took place a few years later, sometime before the 33rd year of the king's reign, and is the subject of the celebrated Tamil poem Kalingattuparani The poem has been introduced again unnecessarily.
Removed intro. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unlike his predecessors like Rajaraja Chola I, Rajendra Chola I and Rajadhiraja Chola I, who took great pride in their expeditions to the island nation Could it be slightly clearer how we get to know this?
Reworded. We know these details from their epigraphs. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • where Jagatipala is called as Veera-salamegan What does the title mean? Please check other such cases too
Removed redundant info. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is also evidence to suggest that Kulottunga, in his youth, (1063 AD) Put the year before the comma
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In his early years, the king styles himself as Rajakesarivarman Should it be "Styled" instead?
Done. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rest everything looks good to me. Great job on writing a comprehensive article like this. Cheers! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 10:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sainsf: Thanks for helping correct the errors and the positive feedback. Nittawinoda (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edits. We can have the final review then:

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Congrats! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sainsf: Thanks for helping me promote the article to GA status. It was a pleasure interacting with you during this period. Nittawinoda (talk) 17:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kulottunga_I/GA2&oldid=893638318"