Talk:The Kashmir Files/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Fowler&fowler (talk · contribs) 13:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article whose subject is a controversial movie released in March 2022 immediately fails in a number of good article criteria.

3) It is not broad in its coverage; tautologically, it cannot as critical opinion has not had time to mature and become broadscale.

4) It is not at all clear that it is neutral. I say this as a major contributor to the lead of the article.

5) It is hardly stable. It may have quietened down some, but still very prone to wild swings. IPs post all the time complaining about the biased coverage.

6) It has one illustration outside of the non-free poster in the infobox. It is of one of the actors at a wedding reception in 2014.

In addition, the nominator has not made any edits to this article. I know they are not required to in general, but in a very recent controversial article, some history of a nominator's edits is very useful for the assurance of other editors who have spent much effort on fine-tuning the words and arriving at a provisional balance. Some very experienced editors have spent days discussing one clause in one sentence. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This should have been a quick fail but IPs complaining about biased coverage is no reason. How many t/p rants does India attract on a monthly basis? TrangaBellam (talk) 12:16, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is an immediate fail: Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations/templates says templates are not required. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:47, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, I might have misunderstood your comment. Apologies. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:47, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler&fowler, per the GA instructions on failing an article, there are a number of steps you, as the reviewer, must do to complete your review once you've decided to fail it. The templates mentioned in those steps are the ones being referred to. Please complete those steps. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:26, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much @BlueMoonset:. That was very helpful. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:10, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note to the nominator: I would like to commend the nominator, @FacetsOfNonStickPans: for the submission. I am sure they have the ability to drastically improve the article. In the past they have shown an appreciation for rigor and evenhandedness in their edits. They should continue to strive for these. In time, perhaps in three months, perhaps in six, the topic itself will become more settled, its body of associated literature more broad-ranging. It would then become very worthy of a renewed GA submission. All the best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]