Talk:Jyestha (goddess)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 11:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

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

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The prose is very poor throughout. This article needs thorough copy-editing by an uninvolved editor with a good command of written English.
 * The organisation is bitty, the whole is not coherent. Please see Shiva for an example of what to aim at.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Those references that I could examine appeared reliable.
 * I added two citation needed tags.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Hard to say, but most of the article relies on one source.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 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):
 * The image File:Jyeshtha.jpg could do with a better description, identifying the period of creation and where it was found.
 * Likewise File:Sagar mathan.jpg
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This article clearly isn't ready for GA status yet. Please get it rewritten in good plain English.  See what other sources are out there.  GA review is not a substitute for peer review.  Please do not nominate at GAN until articles meet the criteria. Failed nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Redtigerxyz has asked for expansion of my comment about organisation. The following sentence above about taking a good look at the organisation of the good article Shiva is meant as a pointer to what a good artcile on a deity should look like.  Obviously an article on Jyestha is never going to be as large as that on Shiva, but the general layout and sectioning would be a good boilerplate for this article. Hope this helps. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This article clearly isn't ready for GA status yet. Please get it rewritten in good plain English.  See what other sources are out there.  GA review is not a substitute for peer review.  Please do not nominate at GAN until articles meet the criteria. Failed nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Redtigerxyz has asked for expansion of my comment about organisation. The following sentence above about taking a good look at the organisation of the good article Shiva is meant as a pointer to what a good artcile on a deity should look like.  Obviously an article on Jyestha is never going to be as large as that on Shiva, but the general layout and sectioning would be a good boilerplate for this article. Hope this helps. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)