Talk:Captivity of Mangalorean Catholics at Seringapatam/GA1

GA Review

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

Starting review. 16:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments

This is quite a long document, but it appears to be well referenced and well illustrated. I will therefore go through the article in more depth, section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last. This might take a few days. Pyrotec (talk) 21:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

This is quite a long document, but it appears to be well referenced and well illustrated. I will therefore go through the article in more depth, section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last. This might take a few days. Pyrotec (talk) 21:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At this point I'm only concentrating on "problems" and ignoring the good points - they will be covered in the final summary.

Background -

The final statement in the first paragraph, i.e. Konkani people, could do with a citation.
- Added a citation with quotes. 122.169.47.54 (talk) 05:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the second paragraph, the statement about Marco Polo is unreferenced - it does not appear to be covered by ref 11.
- It is covered by REF11. You can check South Kanara District Gazetteer 1973, p. 101. If you hate downloading, then you can just check the Gazetteer Page 101 on Google Books. 122.169.47.54 (talk) 05:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I could not find it at time, but your link works Done Pyrotec (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under Hyder Ali-

Appears to be compliant.

Causes -

....to be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 21:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This first paragraph appears to show POV: it states "Tippu had also participated in the conquest of Mangalore along with Hyder in 1768, and was aware of the treachery of the Mangalorean Catholics towards the sovereign, and their help to the British" whereas in Under Hyder Ali it is stated that only some were condemned.

Execution of orders -

Appears to be compliant.

Confiscation of property and destruction of churches -

Appears to be compliant.

Journey from Mangalore to Seringapatam -

Appears to be compliant.

'The 15 year captivity -

Appears to be compliant.

End of captivity and re-establishment -

Appears to be compliant.

Criticism of Tippu -

Appears to be compliant.

Criticism of the Christians -

Appears to be compliant.

Remembrance of captivity -

Appears to be compliant.

Accounts of the Captivity -

Are these two long quoations really needed?

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A comprehensive, well-referenced article.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
A well-referenced article

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
A well-referenced article

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Well-illustrated

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article: well done!. I'm awarding GA-status, and I'm sorry for the length of time to carry out the review. Pyrotec (talk) 15:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]