Talk:British Bangladeshis/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

This has been a good article since January 2009. Unfortunately, in the six and a half years that have passed since then, the article has become very dated and has declined in quality as a result of a lack of maintenance. As a result, I feel that it no longer meets the GA criteria.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article would need copy-editing to resolve grammar mistakes (e.g. "In 2008,Guild of Bangladeshi Restaurateurs members raised member concern that many restaurants came under threat"). There are some inconsistencies of style (e.g. % versus per cent). There are significant WP:REALTIME issues with the article, such as "In recent years, there has been a slight increase in the numbers of Bangladeshi students arriving to the United Kingdom", sourced to a 2007 publication.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The reference list is in reasonable shape, but there are a few citation template errors that need fixing. There is a statement in the lede that is not supported by the source cited.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article is broad in its coverage, but much of the coverage is dated. Much of the statistical information in the article comes from the 2001 rather than the 2011 census. Other examples include "About 30% of all remittance sent to Bangladesh are from Britain as of 1987".

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Seems OK.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   There was some edit warring over the images featured in the infobox earlier this year, but this appears to have stopped.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   The image quality of File:Globe Town Massive (cropped version).png is quite poor.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Quite a lot of work is required here, and my attempt to find editors to help with this did not attract any volunteers. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)