Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Sri Aurobindo/1

Sri Aurobindo

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Sri_Aurobindo/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: Consensus is for delisting - Hardcore Metallica Fan (talk) 19:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC).

I've done a fair amount of cleaning up of this article, which makes me kind of involved and concerned that an individual reassessment might not be appropriate. It is my opinion that it should never have been listed as a GA because, for example:


 * 1) Unsourced statements
 * 2) Misrepresentation of sources
 * 3) Garbled prose, poor punctuation and spelling
 * 4) A complete failure to understand WP:CITEVAR, WP:OVERLINK and similar basic guidance
 * 5) An over-reliance on a primary source, ie: the autobiography of the subject
 * 6) An over-reliance on non-independent sources, being the Foundation etc that bears the name of the subject
 * 7) Missing source details - page numbers, publisher etc

Examples of all of the above are visible in edit summaries made by myself and at least one other. I am not sufficiently familiar with New Age philosophy etc to determine whether much of the latter sections are valid and of due weight etc but, generally speaking, this is just a mess. I've done my best to improve it and can do a bit more yet but I doubt very much that I can raise it to GA level. - Sitush (talk) 19:01, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I have gone through the article once and agree to Sitush on the points he has raised. There is much more work to do in this article to make it to a GA level. All the points raised by Sitush are valid and need to be resolved. Logical1004 (talk) 05:46, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I've just had to do this in the opening section. It's not merely expansion of relevant information (given Aurobindo's future involvement in religion and freedom fighting) but wholescale fixes of incorrect citations and facts. This is so frustrating. - Sitush (talk) 08:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Small note on the Autobiographical notes, please note that the book is not an autobiography ,it is actuall corrections made by Aurobindo himself on claims of biography which various authors were claiming when he was alive, so we can really find contradicting statements in the book itself, I guess Sitush you are already working on this corrective measure(yes it is frustrating too) Shrikanthv (talk) 05:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)