Wikipedia:Featured article review/Sikkim/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed by YellowAssessmentMonkey 02:33, 6 July 2009.

Review commentary

 * Notified Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics, User talk:Nichalp, User talk:Sundar and User talk:Kintetsubuffalo.

This is an article promoted back in February 2005. It currently fails criterion 1(c), as a number of paragraphs remain entirely unsourced throughout the article. Some examples include the entire "Media" section, the first paragraphs of the "History", "Geology" and "Climate" sections, and most of the "Flora and fauna" section. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to address these valid concerns in the coming days. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 03:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've done most of the sourcing. Hometech (talk) 09:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Tashiding.jpg does not have a license. The gallery does not appear to add any new information. DrKiernan (talk) 16:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This is also done. Hometech (talk) 12:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concern are citations, copyrights. Also note the recent change to WP:WIAFA (1c) requiring "high-quality" sources.  YellowMonkey  ( cricket calendar poll! '') 04:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Can this FARC be put on hold? I 'm on a holiday from tomorrow onwards. Hometech (talk) 07:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist, 1c issues, note the recent change to WP:WIAFA (1c) requiring "high-quality" sources. Majority of the sources are "Government of Sikkim", etc. Best instead to draw material from secondary sources independent of the article's subject. This sources deficit is also suggestive of possible overarching POV issues. Cirt (talk) 01:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as possible I've replaced govt sources. Besides, I'm helpless coz hardly anyone knows how a state in the corner of India is booming - Secondary source coverage on most statistics of sikkim is outdated. If you find anything secondary and worthwhile, tell the WikiProject India noticeboard or wait till I return on 5 July. Hometech (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is a significant detraction from the article's quality that should have been addressed long ago. Cirt (talk) 05:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * From when are Government sources being considered as low-quality sources? Do you have a ref for this?--GDibyendu (talk) 11:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not necessarily that they are "low-quality", but certainly not of a high enough quality to be used so overwhelmingly in a WP:FA, over and above usage of secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 02:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not agree with Cirt's Oppose. As per Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches, Website section, Government sites connected to the field may be reliable. I agree secondary sources are better. But there are many cases, where the subject is not so popular, and secondary sources are not available. Rather than relying on outdated information from Secondary sources, it's better to have updated information from sources connected with the field. To build a comprehensive and updated article on Sikkim, "Government of Sikkim" sources have to be used. They may not be of very high quality, bur certainly are not of low quality. If 3 people are disagreeing with Cirt's Oppose, then I think Cirt needs to reconsider his decision. Kensplanet TC 15:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyway, out of 80, I find only 14 Govt. Sources. How does it become a majority? Govt. sources have to be used for statistics Kensplanet TC 15:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment There are still a number of reference formatting issues that need to be addressed. Please be consistent with templates and ref details. Furthermore, this article is in need of a copyedit. Some of the sentences are quite poorly written. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.