Talk:2008 attacks on Uttar Pradeshi and Bihari migrants in Maharashtra/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:2008 attacks on North Indians in Maharashtra/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Wikidās-ॐ 21:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality: Pass
 * B. MoS compliance:Pass
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources: Yes
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Pass
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects: Fail
 * B. Focused: Pass
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias: POV article under WP:CFORK
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc: Pass
 * No edit wars
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: Fail
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: Images provide
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Fail
 * No edit wars
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: Fail
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: Images provide
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Fail
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Fail


 * As I said the article is WP:CFORK or is a WP:POVFORK it has only one external link in from Raj Thackeray, which is by no means an indication of a good exposure or consensus that is needed to build a successful article that needs a balance of different POVs. Because its orphaned the main and prime objective is to find an article of the type WP:SS that should have been a starting point for this article and should contain key information from this article (and context) and has a good live discussion that allows consensus to be build, which is the key to all successful articles. I also would avoid using journal covers as means of illustrating the point. In other words article needs to be restructured to meed consensus guidelines which are the basis of NPOV - as with any conflict there are different sides and a context that is missing and the consensus if the article would have been properly started is the means of arriving at what is called a good article.


 * Because it has only links from Raj Thackeray - it appears to confirm a situation of WP:POVFORK in combination with WP:BLP policies misapplied. Under this situation and unless its clearly placed within a context it should be merged into Raj Thackeray (is it a POV attack on BLP, see WP:BLP principle - 'do not hurt'?) or in any other relevant article that is relevant and has a lively discussion going on as for example Caste-related violence in India or Dalit or create a main summary style article and discuss it in detail in a relevant project noticeboard to (again) ensure a consensus. Key to NPOV is consensus as in WP:YESPOV not WP:RS sources. There is no point in going over parts of article unless this is in place. Wikidās-ॐ 11:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)