Talk:Upanishads/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 13:06, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: found and fixed seven.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 13:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[2] Jezhotwells (talk) 13:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
~~Stray sentence at the end of the lead needs to be consolidated with the preceding paragraph.~~ Y

~~The lead does not fully summarise the article, see WP:LEAD~~ Y
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
~~Citation needed tags from August 2010 need addressing.~~ Y

I added one more citation needed tag. After this, the Upanishads were rapidly translated into Dutch, Polish, Japenese and Russian Y

Assume good faith for off-line sources, sources appear reliable.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The oldest of these, the Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads, were composed during the pre-Buddhist era of India Needs a date as the reader may not be familiar with the pre-Bhuddist era. Y
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Images tagged and captioned.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
~~OK, On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:39, 24 October 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

Fine, thanks for fixing those issues. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 20:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I've addressed the GA review recommendations in the following manner:

GA criterion 1(b)

Updated lead to include a summary of praise and criticism for completeness [3]
Merged the stray sentence withe the paragraph above it [4]

GA criterion 2(a)

Provided citations or deleted content with {{cn}} tags for which I have not been able to find sources [5] [6]

GA criterion 3(a)

Provided the dates of Buddhas birth and death for defining the term "pre-Buddhist" [7] Zuggernaut (talk) 18:10, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]