Talk:Bhagat Singh/GA2

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 14:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

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

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: one found and fixed. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Following Gandhi's withdrawal of the movement after the violent murders of policemen  Could you rephrase this, the meaning is unclear. Did Gandhi withdraw from the movement? Or did he stop the campaign?
 * Rephrased to : after Gandhi called off the non-cooperation movement following the violent murders of policemen. Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * He was 14 when, on February 20, 1921, the custodian of Nankana Sahib (the birthplace of Guru Nanak) and his men, fired on Akali Dal protesters. What did this have to do with the Young Revolutionary Movement?
 * Suitably altered the sentence to make it chronologically correct. Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * and became popular amongst the youth Which youth?
 * removed the word youth. Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * which had prominent leaders like "such as"
 * Followed your suggestion. Modified to such as. Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * ' ' A year later, upon being pressurised by his family,'' "upon being pressurised"?
 * Suitably reworded to A year later, pressurised by his family who wanted him to get married. Rechecked usage of word pressurise from Oxford dictionary(#2, with the comment (also pressurise)). Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * after about five weeks of his arrest
 * reworded to about five weeks after his arrest.Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, the prose is nearly there but needs copy-editing throughout to improve the grammar which is somewhat lacking at the moment. When that has been done, I will look at prose and MoS again.
 * Thankyou for the review, Jez. I do hope these modifications clarify the meaning of the prose and meet the MoS guidelines. I eagerly await your comments. Thanks. Tinpisa (talk) 07:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Can we do something about the multiple use of the word "approvers". I have fixed two instances but it is clearly not good grammar.
 * and issued an order intimating the accused missing preposition, "telling" would be better.
 * Special Tribunal There is a lot of uneccessary repetion in this section. Please rewrite in a simpler summary style
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Adequately cited to RS, spot checks OK, no evidence of OR
 * However I note that there are a large number of close paraphrases or straight cut and pastes from . Thus I have to fail this until the article is rewritten, removing all such instances. Another copyright source whi has been copied is
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Sufficiently good coverage
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Stable
 * 1) 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 licensed and tagged, captions OK
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold for seven days for a thorough copy-edit. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:13, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Failed due to extensive copyright violations. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:41, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've been assisting the nominator in this sort of area and have gone through the article. However, you are a better copyeditor than me, so you may wish to check. I await your thoughts. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Jez, for the review! The article has been given a thorough copy-edit by Grandiose and me. The sentences mentioned above have also been suitably reworded. I look forward to your comments. Thanks. Tinpisa (talk) 21:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Jez, for the review! The article has been given a thorough copy-edit by Grandiose and me. The sentences mentioned above have also been suitably reworded. I look forward to your comments. Thanks. Tinpisa (talk) 21:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)