Talk:2006 Kolkata leather factory fire/GA1

GA Reassessment
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.''

GA Sweeps: On hold
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to determine if the article should remain a Good article. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a GA. However, in reviewing the article, I have found there are several issues that needs to be addressed.


 * 1) The update tag needs to be addressed, it has be there for several months now.
 * 2) Is there a related infobox that can be included in the article, similar for other disasters?
 * 3) There's some excessive wikilinking in the lead and the article, try and delink some of the common terms.
 * 4) "Investigators confirmed that the site of the fire had been used as an illegal leather bag factory." Define what "illegal" means in this instance. Are the bags replicas or actually banned from use? Or was the factory itself illegal?
 * 5) This note "Although this is technically impossible to prove, it may be taken as true due to a lack of results stating otherwise based on a wide range of Google searches." should probably be removed.
 * 6) There are several dead links that need to be fixed. The Internet Archive may be able to help.

I will leave the article on hold for seven days, but if progress is being made and an extension is needed, one may be given. If no progress is made, the article may be delisted, which can then later be renominated at WP:GAN. I'll contact all of the main contributors and related WikiProjects so the workload can be shared. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

These things are now fixed. Hometech (talk) 20:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps: Kept
Good work addressing the issues. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. I went through the article and made a few more changes, please review them. Keep up with the investigations, and be sure to update the results whenever that occurs. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to update the access dates for all of the online sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)