Talk:Amateur Station Operator's Certificate

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Amateur Station Operator's Certificate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. I do not believe that this article fits the requirements for Good Article status. One of the key requirements is a well-written article, and there is almost no prose in this article. The article simply consists of three tables and some prose copied and pasted from http://hamradio.in/amateur_radio/. If anything, this is a copyright violation problem.

The article also seems to lack breadth. For example, how many people hold this certificate? When did it become mandatory? Are there only two websites that mention this certificate? If so, is it sufficiently notable to warrant an article?

If this topic does warrant an article, I urge you to continue your research and try to expand this article. I also believe that the "Syllabus" section needs a complete rewrite, as copying that much text word-for-word could create legal problems.

Pictures, neutrality, and stability aren't a problem. I believe that the concerns I have brought up in this review are substantial, however, and I am failing the nomination. If you believe that this review is in error, please feel free to seek a second opinion at Good article reassessment. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply:

1. I've Rewritten the offending stuff.
2. Added the number of people who hold the licence, plus the first licence holder.

=Nichalp «Talk»= 09:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

=Nichalp «Talk»= 09:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Alleged copyright violation

Parts of the page have been marked up as a copyright violation. However, the alleged text has been copied from a site that quotes the Indian Wireless Telegraph (Amateur Service) Rules, 1978 verbatim. Now as per the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, this is what it has to say:

52.-(1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright, namely:-
(q) the reproduction or publication of-

(i) any matter which has been published in any Official Gazette except an Act of a Legislature;

(ii) any Act of a Legislature subject to the condition that such Act is reproduced or published together with any commentary thereon or any other original matter;

(iii) the report of any committee, commission, council, board or other like body appointed by the Government if such report has been laid on the Table of the Legislature, unless the reproduction or publication of such report is prohibited by the Government;

(iv) any judgment or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority, unless the reproduction or publication of such judgment or order is prohibited by the court, the tribunal or other judicial authority, as the case may be;

As this is published without it being an Act of Legislature, verbatim copying cannot be termed as a copyright violation. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

OK then. In that case, replace the material that is quoted from the act, formatting this in the form of a quotation and citing the act as the source, rather than citing a website that asserts copyright. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Done! See also {{Indian law copyright}} =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Amateur Station Operator's Certificate/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Intro

Hey there! I'm weebiloobil, and I'm here to assess your article. Having noticed that you've had a previous, recent GA Review, I may take some of the comments made there into consideration. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Or if you fancy a chat. Good luck! - weebiloobil (talk) 15:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The Review

This is usually the bit where I go rabbiting on about how you have 7 days to improve the article, you need to do this and that, this image needs fixing, etc. However, this article - and I can't remember the last time this happened to me - has passes without any need to go on hold. The only issue I found was a double full stop, which I corrected myself. Other than that, the article is great, definitely GA status. Well done! - weebiloobil (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I guess it must because I do not believe in GA, preferring to go straight for FAs. I was aiming for a Featured Topic and I still need to research to get this to FA status. I've never got a GA, so thought why not try get at least one? =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

That's the spirit! - weebiloobil (talk) 15:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

:) My FA:GA ratio is now 17:1. What need to be mentioned is that I copy-pasted parts of the featured article Amateur radio in India to fill in some content here. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Does nee matter. Good luck with more FAs - weebiloobil (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Amateur Station Operator's Certificate/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

== GA Status == This article is currently a good article, and so I have assessed it as such (for more, see the review. If, of course, you believe different, then feel free to assess it so - weebiloobil (talk) 15:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 07:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Delisted

This is just a procedural delist as the article has been redirected. AIRcorn (talk) 08:20, 20 April 2018 (UTC)