Talk:Visit of Jung Bahadur Rana to Europe/GA1

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

Reviewer: David Eppstein (talk · contribs) 08:09, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

This is very far from meeting GA sourcing requirements (WP:GAFAIL #1).

This article had a two-month stale [citation needed] tag (at the start of "Meeting with Queen Victoria") at the time of nomination.

Almost all of the footnotes are to a single source (Whelpton), given with no publication detail. The article could reasonably have a single source cleanup banner, or for that matter a notability banner as a single source is not enough to pass WP:GNG. The internal links from the footnotes to the source are all broken. Another publication listed in the references (Dixit) is not used in any footnotes.

There are entire unsourced paragraphs in sections "Patna and Calcutta" (third paragraph), "In Britain" (second paragraph), "Meeting with Queen Victoria" (three out of four paragraphs), "Jung Bahadur's time in Britain" (first and fourth paragraphs), and "In France" (first three paragraphs).

Because of the inadequate reference data I could not check for copying or too-close paraphrasing.

Much of the detail of the trip appears excessive. "Each passenger had a bed and three meals a day."??

Additionally, the photo of the statue lists no provenance that could be used to determine whether the artwork is still in copyright or whether it is taken in a place where photos of copyrighted 3d artworks continue to have the copyright of the artist. It also has little clear connection to this specific visit.

—David Eppstein (talk) 08:09, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

. Thanks for quick check. But I think the decision was too quick. For example: -Best! nirmal (talk) 15:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) The citation tag seems to be placed without reading the references properly. It is in page 189. It has been added now.
 * 2) If you read the book by Whelpton, there are plenty of sources from the British media. Do you think it is necessary to re-cite each of them in this article?
 * 3) Regarding "Patna and Calcutta" is also inside the same book with its own citations. In this paragraph for example, the citation 20 i.e page 216 should be sufficient. Similarly for other parts, the citation following after the text should be adequate.
 * 4) Agree. The excessive text could be rephrased or removed.
 * 5) The photos rightly shows the context of the texts such as Jung Bahadurs illustrations painted in London and Paris. Regarding copyright, I am also not sure, I used as it I found it in the wikimedia. The first photo, however, could be removed if it seems in appropriate.