Wikipedia:Peer review/University of Calcutta/archive1

University of Calcutta


I've listed this article for peer review because I want to promote it to GA.

Thanks,  ❯❯❯  S A H A   16:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like you've had to wait a while for this, . Good articles are reviewed against six criteria (WP:GA?). I can see a lot of effort has gone into the article. I think that two areas that are likely to be problems are:

(1) lengthy paragraphs with citations only at the end. This makes it difficult to verify each part (2) the 'well written' criteria. - The article has a lot of long lists such as "The Faculty of Arts consists of the departments of Ancient Indian History and Culture, archaeology, anthropology, Arabic and Persian, Bengali, language and literature, comparative Indian literature, creative writing, classics, demography, economics, ethnic studies, English language and literature, Hindi, history, linguistics, museology, Pali, philosophy, psychology, political science, public policy and administration, sociology, Sanskrit, South and South-East Asian Studies, theater and drama, gender and women's studies". I don't think these lists are very helpful or encyclopedic. Also, some lists are all in capitals which is hard to read "The departments of History, Ancient Indian History and Culture, Islamic History and Culture, South and Southeast Asian Studies, Archaeology, Political Science, Business Management are and Museology are situated on this campus" - The article has some sections which are very short, such as "Student life" - The article uses sometimes quite vague language, such as They monitor and ensure the smooth operation of the university and its affiliated colleges and the university's funding in "Administration".

I'm afraid I can't think off the top of my head where to go from here. I think it's great how the article is forming but it might be useful to see if you can find a WP:GA or featured article that is a university and model the article on that. Good luck! --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot . I tried to solve the issues you mentioned. Please check.  ❯❯❯  S A H A   20:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @ that has changed a lot! I recommend you give it a go for WP:GA. However I also recommend have a look and see if there are any similar articles that are already GAs or FAs that you can model against - it will be useful for you in case you've forgotten any areas, and also for the reviewer to review against. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)