Wikipedia:Peer review/Pune/archive1

Pune
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… The article has improved a lot recently, especially with citations. Thanks,  S Pat   talk 13:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments Keep working away at these issues and it will continue to improve. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The references need work. Footnote 4 is an example of a ref that is well presented - the author (where one is identifiable) is stated, and above all the publishing source is listed. This is essential to assisting subsequent discussion of whether sources are sufficiently reliable, which will be important if editors ever want to get this article to good article or feature article status.
 * The history section contains too much information that is very recent and topic-specific. Consider either shortening (moving some material to article History of Pune), or moving topic-specific recent material to the relevant topic area (eg. to transport section). History of Pune should be longer than the history section in Pune, which is not currently the case!
 * There are whole sections, such as "road" (under transport), "military establishments" and most of "Literature and Theatre", that lack any references at all.
 * Military establishments seems a strange section, that i've not seen in other top-level articles about major cities, and which may give undue weight to that particular subject. Perhaps more limited coverage, spread amongst "economy" and "education and research", might be better.

Comments by Dana boomer Hi SPat. It looks like you and some other editors have made a good start on cleaning up the article. However, there is still quite a bit of work that needs to be done. You didn't specify above where you would like the article to go (i.e. just regular cleanup, GA status, or even FA), but I'm going to assume that you want to go at least to GA. To that end, I agree with the comments that Hamiltonstone made above, and I have a few more comments besides that.
 * All of the banners and in-line tags need to be taken care of. The banners especially are a quick-fail criteria for GA.
 * There are a lot of bulleted and numbered lists in the article. These are generally discouraged by MOS, and I think that many or all of them could be easily converted into prose.
 * There are a lot of one and two sentence paragraphs, which make the article look very choppy, and make it harder to read. These should be combined with other paragraphs, or possibly expanded in some cases.
 * There are a lot of red links in the article. Although red links are tolerated and in some cases encouraged, please make sure that all of the red links go to subjects that are actually notable enough to have articles written about them at some point. If the subject isn't notable enough for its own article, don't link it.
 * The Sports section has a lot of really short sections. Some or all of these could probably be combined, with Sports institutions the only one that I would leave as its own subsection.
 * It is very important that all web references have titles, publishers and access dates. As Hamiltonstone said, this makes it easier to verify the references and make sure they go to reliable sources.
 * Check this link, there are quite a few dead links which need to be fixed.
 * Check this link, there are several dabs that should be fixed.
 * I have dealt with the dab links hamiltonstone (talk) 02:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ref #70 (Pune Basketball) is a blog, which are not generally considered reliable sources.
 * If you plan to take this article to FAC, you may want to check out the FA criteria on high quality sources. This means that if a higher quality source (generally a book or journal article) can be found, it should be used in place of a low quality, though possibly reliable source (generally webpages). It is often easier to add these references when initially referencing the article, rather than trying to go back through and replace lower quality sources just before a FAC. Although books and journals may not be the best references (or they may not be available) for subjects on modern-day Pune, they should probably be used for historical areas such as the History section.

I hope these thoughts help. I have watchlisted this page, so please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 01:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)