Talk:Zakir Husain/GA1

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

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 22:56, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I'll take this nomination—I'll take up to a week to get round to it. This review will be used for Wikicup points. Please consider reviewing an article yourself—the backlog is long, and the WP:GAN list promotes nominators with a good reviewing score. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * I have made several changes to satisfy MOS:LAYOUT. See below for issues.
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * See below.
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * See below.
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * The images could be larger, and the stamps could be combined using
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Couple of minor issues above and below. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * The images could be larger, and the stamps could be combined using
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Couple of minor issues above and below. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Couple of minor issues above and below. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Random source spotcheck

 * 18 good
 * 21 good
 * 44 a page number would be helpful, but good
 * 46 good
 * 55 AGF
 * 60 good
 * 106 good
 * 131 AGF
 * 141 good
 * 145 unnecessary

Other comments

 * note b) is very unnecessary (MOS:EDITORIAL)
 * Try to eliminate single sentence/single line paragraphs
 * I will conduct a minor copyedit before promotion. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)


 * *Citation 145 is the source for the claim of the tomb featuring arches and jalis in it. So that's not unnecessary, is it? * Regarding note b) - the comparison made is attributed, it isn't original research, is clearly mentioned as such in the cited source and to me it appears not to use any of the words/style mentioned in the MOS. So should it still be edited out? * Have clubbed the images as suggested and made a few changes to the captions. Ashwin147 (talk) 07:22, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Expanded the lede. There are three single line paragraphs in the article now (expanded on a fourth yesterday) but I'm at a loss on how to eliminate them. Ashwin147 (talk) 07:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , note b) states "thus seeking to apportion blame unlike Husain who beseeched the leaders gathered to end the violence" in wikivoice, not as a statement of Vadarajan. If you wish to keep it, I would suggest removing the lengthy quote of Vajpayee's speech, and placing Varadarajan's exact words in quote marks. I've joined the single-line paragraphs. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:15, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I've tweaked it now and think that should fix the concern you've flagged. Also added a few more images to the article. Ashwin147 (talk) 09:06, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , as the quote from from a memorial lecture to Zakir Husain and was therefore somewhat biased right off the bat, I've edited it down to adhere it to NPOV further. I'll promote this article now. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)