Talk:Naraka (Hinduism)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dwaipayanc (talk · contribs) 18:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


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

Passing this article. It is indeed an interesting article, offering information on different type of hells. The description is sometimes quite repugnant, but enjoyable.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: