Talk:Akku Yadav/GA1

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

Reviewer: Psiĥedelisto (talk · contribs) 13:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion
I will be reviewing this article. So far it seems GA-quality to me, but I'd like to ask you though to email me the pages you used of the print source Stackhouse (2007) for verifiability. Is that okay with you, ? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 13:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * what source? is it a book i cited? also i can't use my email for privacy reasons Statik N (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The source is, as mentioned, Stackhouse (2007). Cite note 4 as of revision 966223753. If email doesn't work for you, what would? Twitter DM? Discord? I suppose you may also simply upload to Imgur as only one page is cited, page 120. For future reference you can make a ProtonMail e-mail for free and without providing your real name. It may require a phone number, last I knew it did not, but if it does, that would only be given to ProtonMail, I wouldn't see it. Best, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 02:38, 19 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I sadly can't find the pdf i read it on. Statik N (talk) 02:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * This is quite a problem, because before asking you, I searched it on Google Books. It says, No results found in this book for Yadav. I want to be sure this isn't a WP:FICTREF. I'm not accusing you of anything—I don't think it is. But, I want to be sure, before I pass your article. Best, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 02:57, 19 July 2020 (UTC)


 * here it is https://books.google.com/books?id=Pb0w12-0nY0C&pg=PA120&lpg=PA120&dq=%22anjana+bai+borkar%22+%22Akku+yadav%22&source=bl&ots=aWGERGC4hk&sig=ACfU3U1LAemZ4eNaIR-OM4JilVy4cHsQQg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-jI7e39rqAhVNgnIEHe22DkAQ6AEwAnoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22anjana%20bai%20borkar%22%20%22Akku%20yadav%22&f=false Statik N (talk) 02:09, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

pending outcome of. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 21:12, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * My reading of the consensus outcome of the above discussion is that only the infobox photo has a credible claim to passing the WP:NFCC. Please remove the other photos (they'll be automatically deleted by a bot if not being used in any articles). Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 00:05, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


 * will it pass if i do? Statik N (talk) 00:46, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've reviewed everything else. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 01:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * done Statik N (talk) 02:12, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Review itself

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

✅ A well written, interesting article about a serial killer who corrupted several Indian police officers. I always love to see authors buck the WP:BIAS trends, and do so without sacrificing on article quality. See discussion above for what problems were solved during review process. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 02:40, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Some more work could be done in this regard, but Yadav was, per all the sources, a horrible person, and is long deceased, so it is not as critical as it would be in a WP:BLP.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: